Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Packet - 09/24/1984
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate SEPT. 24, 1984, 7:30 P.H. sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH ask to be recognized by the Chair at the start 10865 SW WALNUT of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items TIGARD, OREGON 97223 are asked to be kept to 2 minutes or less; longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by con- tacting either the Mayor or City Administrator. 1. REGULAR MEETING: 1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance 1.3 Call To Staff and Council For Non-Agenda Items 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (2 Minutes or Less, Please) 3. LID FINANCE REPORT o Delinquencies b Foreclosures (Verbal) o Due on Sale ORDINANCE NO. 84- o Finance Director 1 4. TAX BASE ELECTION REPORT 6 TMC HOUSEKEEPING AMENDMENTS o City Attorney 5. TRUCK LIMITS ON DURHAM ROAD o Report (Capt. Jennings) o Carmen Drive Discussion (Director of Public Works) 6. REVIEW OF SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 8-84A PUGET CORP. NPO #5 A review of the Planring Commission decision for a nonremonstrance as a condition of approval for SDR 8-84A. The property is zoned I-P (Industrial Park). Location: 7440 SW Bonita Rd., Tigard, (Wash Co. Tax Map 2S1 12A, Tax Lot 800). o Review Continued From 9/10/84 o Summation by Planning Staff o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination o Consideration of Council 7. FEES b CHARGES 7.1 Report 7.2 Resolution No. 84- BREAK 8. DISPATCH CONTRACT REPORT b DISCUSSION o Chief of Police 9. COUNCIL MEDICAL BENEFITS DISCUSSION/RECONSIDERATION o Councilor Edin 10. COUNCIL MEETING EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY DISCUSSION 11. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. anyone may request that an item be removed by motion .for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 11.1 Approve Council Minutes September 10, 11, b 17, 1984 11.2 Receive and File o Department Reports o Business Tax Forms 11.3 Report On High School Football Game Traffic 12. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff 13. ADJOURNMENT (lw/1958A) COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 - 7:30 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor John Cook; Councilors: Tom Brian (arrived at 7:37 P.M.), Phil Edin, Kenneth Scheckla (arrived at 7:37 P.M.), and Ima Scott; City Staff: Robert Adams, Chief of Police (left at 10:00 P.M.); Alice Carrick, Records Supervisor (left at 10:00 P.M.); Frank Currie, Director of Public Works; Bob Jean, City Administrator; Kelley Jennings, Captain (left at 10:00 P.M.); Patt Martin, Deputy City Recorder; Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel; and Jerri Widner, Finance Director (left at 7:50 P.M.). 2. CALL TO STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS a. Add 11.4 to Consent Agenda - Status of Terrace Heights Mobile Home Residents b. Motion by Councilor Edin, seconded by Councilor Scott, to appoint Patt Martin as Deputy City Recorder through October 31, 1984. 3. VISITOR'S AGENDA a. Tualatin Fire District #I1 signed up to speak on $8. However, Mayor Cook advised this item was not a Public Hearing. / 4. LID FINANCE REPORT ORDINANCE NO. 84-55 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 13.04 DEFINING WHEN INSTALLMENT PAYMENTS BECOME DELINQUENT, PROVIDING REMEDY; AND REQUIRING ASSESSMENTS TO BE PAID IN FULL THROUGH THE SALE OR TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY OR THROUGH THE DIVISION OF LAND. a. Finance Director, Jerri Widner, gave a summation of the ordinance stating that currently the Tigard Municipal Code has not defined when an assessment account becomes delinquent, nor has the City established any criteria for buyers of property to assume existing assessments. This ordinance defines delinquent accounts and requires assessments to be paid in full when ownership of property changes. Councilor Scott concurred with Finance Director. Councilor Edin suggested using fair processing fee for changing name and increase percentage according to market. He felt the property owners should not be forced to pay assessment off. Legal Counsel suggested the language be adopted in this Ordinance until standards for criteria are tighter. Cb. Motion by Councilor Scheckla seconded by Councilor Brian to adopt. Motion passed by 3-2 majority vote of Council present, Councilor Edin and Scott voting Nay. Second reading will be required. Page 1 - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24. 1984 FINANCE DIRECTOR LEFT AT 7:50 P.M. 5. TAX BASE ELECTION REPORT 6 TMC HOUSEKEEPING AMENDMENTS a. Legal Counsel recommended tloake t Measauree es#2 t this time because ofnot knowing the results of Bal 6. TRUCK LIMITS ON DURHAM ROAD a. Captain Jennings gave a summation of the problem of weight limits on Durham Road and the location of the truck limit signs. He stated the larger trucks, not the smaller trucks, were the to turn problem. Once on Durham Road, there is not a place around. He stated Washington County will be holding a meeting on September 25, 1984 and will be passing an Ordinance to have 20,000# limit restriction put on Durham Road between 3:00 P.M. and 9:00 A.M. After the County adopts their Ordinance, he requested the City Council adopt a similar ordinance for the city. Mayor Cook stated Wes Myllenheck talked to him and assured him the Ordinance would be inacted at the September 25, 1984 meeting. As soon as the County Ordinance is available, Captain Jennings will distribute a copy to the City Council. Councilor Scott read a letter from the Summerfield Association stating their appreciation to Ima Scott and Paul Phillips, State Representative District #9, for their assistance. She also read a letter from Paul Phillips stating his appreciation to Ima Scott for alerting this problem to him. b. Director of Public Works suggested a similar Ordinance be drafted for Carmen Drive also. It was suggested that an ordinance be drafted to include Durham Road and streets that in the future would have the same problem. 7. REVIEW OF SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 8-84A PUGET CORP. NPO #5 a. Public Hearing Opened (continued from 9/10/84) Director of Public Works gave the summation for the Director of Planning and Development who was absent. He stated the applicant appealed the Planning Director's decision. b. Public Testimony John Osburn, Attorney for Puget ill S yFifth, Portland, was concerned if they were being treated ned about the merits of the case not the findings. He stated staff directed him to go through the Planning Commission and felt the Planning Commission decision should hold. He stated he did not receive the Planning Commission findings. He also asked that the pictures that were presented to the Planning Commission as record be viewed by the Council. The pictures were not in the file that was brought to the Council meeting. Page 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 s Legal Counsel stated the Applicant had the opportunity to table f this item to a later date until the pictures were located and viewed by the council. r Mr. Osburn stated he would be satisfied with looking at the map that was included in the file so the public hearing could continue. Mr. Osburn stated this was an industrial area and street repairs, sidewalks, curbs and widening of roads was not timely. He felt it did not make sense to make the improvements at this time. He also noted that 5 of the Planning Commissioners were in favor of the Puget Corp. for later improvements. Mr. Osburn read a letter addressed to the planning Commission asking them to allow the improvements be made at a later date when Bonita Street was improved and enter into a non-remonstrance agreement. C. Staff recommended half-street improvements be required per the TMC. t d. Council Consideratiot. Councilor Brian recommended half-street improvements be required on 74th Avenue and have a non-remonstrance agreement signed on Bonita Street. Councilors Scheckla and Scott and Mayor Cook felt the Code and City Council policy should be followed on requiring half-street improvements. Councilor Edin supported the Planning Commission decision for the half-street improvements not be required. Geoff Levear, Puget Corp. , 7440 SW Bonita Rd., Tigard, felt they were going through the steps as per staff recommendation. He was asked to go through the Planning Commission and signed papers after the 8/15 Planning Commission meeting upon approval of Council. He feels now by going back to the Planning Director's decision they were going backwards. f e. Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Scott, to uphold the City staff's decision and put half-street improvements c in now and return with findings and draft final order for 10/8/84 if not 10/22/84 regular City Council meeting. Motion approved by 3-2 majority vote of Council present, with Councilor Brian and Edin voting Nay. Legal Counsel and Councilor Scott expressed concerned that the files were not complete. A copy of the findings and draft final order will be mailed to Puget Corp. upon completion. 8. FEES CHARGES 8.1 Bob Jean stated the memo was a summary of the fees and charges. It also listed fee titles that had no current rate. Page 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 a. Motion by Commissioner Edin, seconded by Commissioner Scott, to draft a resolution to set the current rate at SOX of the cost for those fee titles that do not have a current rate. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 8.2 RESOLUTION NO. 84-69A A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PRESCRIBING FEES FOR STREET AND ALLEY EXCAVATION PERMITS AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Edin to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. i RECESSED at 9:11 P.M. s RECONVENED at 9:37 P.M. 9. DISPATCH CONTRACT REPORT b DISCUSSION a. Councilor Edin recommended that 2 or more alternate agencies review the RFP to see if this is what the City wants. All Councilors had questions about the RFP and felt other neutral agencies with knowledge of this item would help to answer their j questions. b. Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Scott to have City Attorney work with Councilor Edin to propose 2 or more neutral consultants to look at the RFP and review. The names of the proposed consultants will be brought back on 10/8/84. E Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. Chief Adams gave a short summary of what was :1 the report. CHIEF, CAPTAIN b RECORDS SUPERVISOR LEFT AT 10:00 P.M. # 10. COUNCIL MEDICAL BENEFITS DISCUSSION/RECONSIDERATION a. Councilor Edin felt that all members of Council had insurance through their own private company or spouse. He also stated he talked to the Marketing Representative, Robert Odell, from Blue Cross and were overpaying Blue Cross by staying on Plan IV. Mr. Odell wrote in his letter that the Council could change to Plan II even though it is past the deadline for coverage. b. Motion by Councilor Edin, seconded by Councilor Brian, to have Blue Cross Plan II for coverage for all Council members. Discussion followed regarding the difference in both Plan II and ( IV. Councilor Scheckla felt the Council deserved Plan IV since \ they did not get Comp. time for going to Council meetings as staff does. Page 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 Motion approved by 3-2 majority vote of Council present, Councilors Scott and Scheckla voting Nay. 11. COUNCIL MEETING EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY DISCUSSION a. Councilor Scott proposed an amendment to the Ordinance now in effect for pay of Council meetings to be averaged over a three month period not to exceed 12 paid meetings nor to exceed $180. City Administrator will draft amended Ordinance and bring back to 10/8/84 City Council. 12. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 12.1 Approve Council Minutes September 10, 11, & 17, 1984 12.2 Receive and File o Department Reports o Business Tax Forms 12.3 Report On High School Football Game Traffic 12.4 Receive and File - Status of Terrace Heights Mobile Home Residents a. Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Edin, to approve consent agenda items. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 13. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff 13.1 Call Special Executive Session on October 8, 1984 at 6:25 P.M. at Fowler Junior High School to consider City Attorney appointment under ORS 192.660 (1)(a) . a. Motion by Councilor Scott, seconded by Councilor Brian, to call Special Executive Session on October 8, 1984 at 6:25 P.M. at Fowler Junior High School. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 14. ADJOURNMENT at 10:35 P.M. Deputy City Recorder - City of Tigard ATTEST: C r - City of Tigard (pa/2002A) Page 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal 7_6116 P O.BOX 370 PHONE(503)684-0360 Notice BEAVERTON.OREGON 97075 RECEIVED i Legal Notice Advertising SEP 26 1984 ' CITY OF TIGARD • ❑ Tearsheet Notice CITY OF TIGARD P. O. BOX 23397 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit TIGARD, OR 97223 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, )ss COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) Susan Pinkley being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal cierk, of theTja aa.r d Ti M R-, - a imp-- a newspaper of general circulation as T dgefa�ea in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at he aforesaid county and state; that the --CitytyCouncil Regular Meeting a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for__ successive and consecutive in the following issues: Sept • 20L 184 __ _ l 7- k J�'rn . 2 4 1 QSubscribed and to before me this_ Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Exp3-16-87 AFFIDAVIT sw a �# �. k F t r. I AGENDA ITEM # �_ - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) ' Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but time may require that we schedule your items for a future agenda. Please contact the City Administrator as to agenda scheduling. Thank you. NAME, ADDRESS b AFFILIATION ITEM DESCRIPTION i t t 2t 7y i' 1 DATE C, — Ll — y I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: r o S ******************************************************************************* Proponent (For Issue) opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation / G6.o F i ICE A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 AGENDA ITEM #: DATE SUBMITTED: SEPTEMBER 18, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: n/a ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: DUE ON SALE ORDINANCE NO. 84- REQUESTED BY: J. Widner DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: J. Widner t! - CITY ADMINISTRATOR: saasasaasxa:axxxaaxsas:xxa xa xaxxszx xassaasxaaxx axeasas ass xxssxa a.ssxxxaaaaxaxxs INFORMATION SUMMARY As stated before, the Bancroft accounts are undercapitalized and many have delinquent accounts. When reviewing the Tigard Municipal Code for Collection of Delinquent accounts, I noticed that the code stated collections would be pursuant to ORS 223.505 to 223.650. What wasn't included, however, was a definition and remedy of delinquent accounts which is ORS 223.270. I have attached an ordinance for your review and approval defining a delinquent account and a remedy for collection. Another situation developing that costs the City additional money without recovery is the exchange of assessed property from the owner at the time of assessment to a new owner. Included in the attached ordinance is provision for a policy that requires the payment of the entire balance plus interest when property changes owners due to sale, parceling or transfer. In addition to reducing costs, the City may be able to recoup its losses on those Barcrofts that have been undercapitalized, by investing the pay-offs for higher interest than what is currently being charged to the account. ---------- ALTERNATIVES xaxxs ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Do nothing. 2. Act on the ordinance attached. :aa:aassssaaasaasa sssaaseas:aaaaxasxaassa:sassaaa:a:sa:ssaassasaa sxssaaasa SUGGESTED ACTION I recommend that the City Council establish the policy outlined in the attached ordinance providing direction to City staff. (0598F) l '�: �� � ,� `i4�- oiup� � ao% r/q J �%'% ., f CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 AGENDA ITEM N: DATE SUBMITTED: SEPTEMBER 14, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: TAX BASE REPORT REQUESTED BY: CITY ATTORNEY DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR: INFORMATION SUMMARY State Ballot Measure #2 has unknown and related impacts on City Measure #51. Attached is the full text of Measure #2 and the summary Attorney ( General 's Opinion. l The City Attorney will brief you further on these items September 24, 1984/ See memo attached. ::asaszsas:aszas:ssass:ss:zssssasssa:sss:aa=aacaaa==c==a=a==c===c=====_=c=as=acaz a ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A ssa:ssaas::sszsaaaazzssaaszssaa=caaa ac sva saa=a=ssa=a========a=__======a==z:=a==__� CSUGGESTED ACTION NONE I NA(-1-1:1) ItY '111. N601'1,1 ()v Tm; STATE OF OltIXA N: 1'ne Co1,!;t I LuLiOn of Lhc State of oreyon is a,oended by creating a new Section to be known, ,,c ::ertro,, 11.A. to Article XI and to read: ©RTTrrE XT SECT10d_ll A (new �ectionl ( 1) ndithe provisions of Section 11 , Article XI of this Constitution, the (a) Notwithstanding maximus, amount of ad ndingvalorem taxes levied per annw:t against any real property shall not exceed 1-1/28 of the assessed value of such property, or the amount levied for the fiscal year beginnin, July 1 , 1983, wnicnever is less. (b) For the initial fiscal year beginning July 1, 1985, revenues produced py taxes actn,,, ized under this subsection shall be distributed amontj taxing units in the same pi(.potLlun as exiStecr for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1903. ( 2) The limitation imposed uy subsection (1) shall not amply to an valorem cares or spect.aI u;sess.,lents levicu to pay the interest and redemption entries en any bonder in(rebtedness authurized prior to or concurrent with the dace upon which this amu,,tent becomes, ettcctive. Tne assessed value of any real property snail not increase in any one (1) year by ( 3) year in more than 2a over the prior year's assessed value. Assessed value for trio tlearlb beginning which anis amenament takes eftect shall ne the assesses value or cne fiscal y 9 July 1, 1981, arjusted for trio intervening period under provisions of the section. ( All rroperty solo, purchased, newly constructed, or Subject co change of ownership q) A subaeyuent l Lite fiscal year beginning July 1, 1985, shall be assigned the assessed value it had, or would cave had in Erie case o� newly constructed property, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1981, adjuster for Ene intervening perio,i under provisions of subsection (3i. ( 5) T,le Legislative Assembly shall provide for property tax relief for renters from funds generally available for State expenses, or otherwise dedicaceu oy this Constitution. ( 6) (a) Nor-withstanding suosection (1) , iron am after Elle effective ate o this a.�,enuw „ or ent, cne State, eaccity, county, sheciai ristrict, scnool district, taxing unit of or within zne state may increase a Lax rate or special assessnent Lir :.ia levy a new special assessoent, it suc tax or h n actiowuuic. cause an increa a in govetn!.,entai revenues, ol,1y r,y a r,ajority vote of Lite leoal votoirarioilelr,e voterr, or)�cne1. � taxinc;ou�nicnvotleeonithe provic:^u tnit of least nifty percent (50b) 7 .lu�suun. (b) A .lue-,tion author-Qu Dy this subset, ton shall Lie sub:aitzed to the voter:: in a form sl,(-, trying cne reason for t1 n. new tax, tar. rate, or si>ecial asse_•S'.cnt; Erie a,,uunt of reve,:ue i.t is intenueci to prouuce; an„ toe rise perruu during wnicn IL ie. to be in a fcic. (c) EleCLluns autnollzeu uy Enis 5uu:;c•Cci0n scall Lie lirateu co the chits _uesday in llai anu the rir:+t Tuesday aster the first nonday in Wove:�oLr• Fro:,, and after t,,e effeccive date or chis alaendner,t, trio state, earn cit} . county, ( gl1 overn:,:ental entity may levy a license fee, scudo! district, municipa: corporation or oU;cr g user fee, or sevice charge only to the extent. that soca tee or cnBerge procures trio revenues neces:;.try to oe,,ray cne actual expense of Lhe service or the cost of administering the regulation for wnicn the fee or cnar�e is levieu. ( 8) Federal Social Security benefits scall not he conf:icered income for purposes of Stott or local taxation. ( 9) SUI)LeCLions (1) ,itroug,, (q) of Lnis Sectiun snail uecorae �Efective :or the fiscal useccions (5) tnroug., (8) saajj beco:nc effective upon adoption year beginning July 1, 1985. Su or this amellowent. (l0) If any section, portion, clause or p:rrase o- this Articic iz for any reason neld to be invalid or un.onsticuc�onai, crit• remaining sections, portions, clauses and p:,rase shall not be affecces but snail re'r,,ain in full force and eitect. (pp) In (ase of coniiIct between this initiative and illy lr,iciativu or re:erendum sunc,,icteu to tnr vote of trio people or Liv' State of Oregon suo:,C,iuenL to tnl:: initiative's frlrng with the Secretary u. State and i•ciuf to Lir concuIrcj,t wll t chis initiative's tubr.rr;;.ion to Enu voce of the people, only the initi�tive Lir ret, rrn.iw�t tecerviur, a majority voce and the uigner.t numoer Lir afrirmative vete =;nail uc,'ome p,. It of the Cons.iiution. OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DAVE FROHNMAYER FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 30, 1984 Attorney General Dave Frohnmayer today released the longest opinion ever issued by the Department of Justice. The 265-page opinion answers 63 major questions about the meaning and effect of Ballot Measure 2, the proposed property tax limitation. "Measure 2 is fundamental and extremely far-reaching in its legal consequences for the peration and finances of state and local governments, " Frohnmayer said. "It is very complicated and despite our best efforts many legal questions about its application would necessarily have to be resolved by the courts . we urge all Oregon citizens who are concerned about the educational system and government services to inform themselves carefully about these many issues before the November election . " Measure 2 is similar in many respects to property tax limitation measures proposed in Oregon in 1966, 1968, 1978 , 1980 and 1982 . However, there are many significant differences in this measure from past proposals. In interpreting the measure, today' s opinion says "we have sought the object and purpose of the measure through broad and general lines of inquiry rather than through narrow technical principles of interpretation for the ultimate object is to give effect to the intent of the people should they adopt it. " -more- A team of ten lawyers from the Department of Justice drafted today' s opinion which was requested by legislative leadership. NOTE• A summary of the 2 opinion is attached, it has been prepared for the convenience of members of the news media and the public. � M � t F, Summary of Attorney General ' s Opinion No. 8156 { Ballot Measure Two PROPERTY TAX LIMITATION Questions 1 through 18 relating to Subsection (1 ) Measure 2 is a limitation on the amount of property tax that ay. The taxes that a given parcel real property is required to p of real property can be required to pay is an amount equal to 11h percent of its 1961 adjusted assessed value or the amount that the property was required to pay in the 1983-84 tax year, whichever is less . Before a taxing unit, including the state, can impose a new tax or increase a tax rate which increases government revenue , it must obtain permission from the people . (See summary of Subsection (6 ) also) Measure 2 is a constitutional measure. It does not repeal any other section of the constitution. If the measure is adopted, it must operate in conjunction with other sections of the constitution. The six percent tax base limitation, which limits the amount a taxing unit may levy without a vote of the people, will still apply. Both limitations are to be applied simultaneously . The "uniformity of taxation" clause of the constitution must still be observed when determining the amount each district can impose on property within the 11h percent limitation. The Opinion 8156 Summary/ 2 legislature would have the responsibility for providing a method for allocating or apportioning among the taxing units the amounts of tax that a property is required to pay to each when the Measure 2 limits are reached or exceeded. Measure 2 requires that the tax distribution in 1985 must be in the same proportion as in 1983 . Under this provision, which applies only to the 1985-86 tax year, it is probable that some taxing units will receive more money than they levied for that year, and others will receive less . Districts organized since 1983 will not be able to receive tax money in 1985-86 under this measure. After the 1985 distribution, it will be up to the legislature to develop a distribution method. EXCEPTIONS FOR BOND REPAYMENT Questions 19 through 24 and Question 36 relating to Subsection (2 ) Measure 2 contains an exception to the lug percent limitation for ad valorem taxes or special assessments levied to pay interest and redemption charges on bonded indebtedness authorL: :d on or before the effective date of the measure . The following state bonds are already constitutionally authorized and may be issued if Measure 2 becomes effective: state power development, reforestation, higher education building projects, veterans ' farm and home loans, pollution control , water Opinion 8156 Summary/ 3 { development, housing for the elderly, and small scale energy is a $150,000,000 authorization for loans . In addition, there building and maintaining roads. E Revenue bonds and other nongeneral obligation bonds are not subject to the lug percent limitation. Use of "tax increment bonds" for urban renewal projects will be greatly limited by Measure 2 because of the annual maximum 2 percent increase in assessed value. COMPUTATION OF ASSESSED VALUE Questions 25 through 35 relating to Subsections (3) and (4) Measure 2 limits increases in assessed value of any real pro- perty to not more than 2 percent over the assessed value for the prior year . Assessed value for the fiscal year in which the pro- posed measure takes effect (July 1 , 1985 ) would be the assessed value for July 1 , 1981 , as adjusted for the intervening period under the provisions of the measure . The 2 percent increases can be compounded. Thus the maximum assessed value for the first year the measure is effective would be approximately 108 . 35 per- cent of the assessed value on the 1981 tax statement . However, the 1981 assessed value is to be determined after Cadjustment or cprrection for errors and mistakes under existing statutory procedures . Even property erroneously omitted from the Opinion 8156 Summary/ 4 i tax rolls can be added back on the rolls in accordance with sta- tutory procedures . The assessed value of any particular parcel of property could not increase more than 2 percent over the prior year' s assessed value. If the actual value of the property increases less than 2 percent over the previous year' s assessed value, or decreases below it, the property will be assessed at its actual market value for that year. That lower assessment can be increased only by 2 percent the next year, even if the market value rebounds much more. In other words , the measure imposes a ceiling only on assessed value, it does not mandate a floor. Measure 2 freezes "special use" assessed values, such as a farm use assessment , into law for all time, unless the Oregon Constitution is amended. That assessment can increase only by 2 percent increments . This is true even if the property becomes disqualified from the special use assessment . Thus, farm use property with a low property assessment in 1981 would continue to enjoy that low assessment (plus t}1e 2 percent maximum increase per year) even though the property becomes disqualified because it is no longer used for farm purposes . This "could create fun- damentally unfair results" between properties similarly situated with a possible resulting violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. However, property exempt from taxation in 1981 could be added to the assessment and tax rolls if the exemption is lost. Its assessment would be that which it would have had in f i opinion 8156 summary/ 5 1981 , if not exempt, plus 2 percent annual increases if the value increased at least that much. ifro erty becomes disqualified for a special assessment, it P P e p enalty will be applicable as pro- is possible that a one-tim vided by current laws, if the statutory disqualification charge rather than an additional ad valorem is held to be a penalty i tax . The measure would not affect the legal bonding capacity of state and local governments . This is so because the bonding capacity is tied to true cash value whereas the measure only imposes a limit on assessed value . As a practical matter, however, the measure would severely erode the ability of state taxes to pay off and local government to levy ad valorem property new bonds because of the lug percent limitation. Except as to bonds authorized before or on the effective date of the measure, this would make it difficult or impossible to market new bonds, or would require payment of higher interest rates . Property newly added to the tax rolls after 1981 or after the measure becomes effective would be assessed at the 1981 assessed value that it would have had if it had then been on the rolls , plus any applicable 2 percent adjustments . r opinion 8156 Summary/ 6 PROPERTY TAX RELIEF FOR RENTERS Questions 37 through 40 relating to Subsection (5) Measure 2 requires the legislature to provide for property tax relief for renters . Unlike previous measures, it does not mandate relief for homeowners . The opinion is required to define "renter" for the purposes of Measure 2 and holds that "renter" is not confined to those presently receiving statutory p.-operty tax relief, but includes all renters of real property. It does not include renters of personal property or renters of tax exempt property. However, it does include renters of commercial and agriculture properties , and government bodies and tax exempt institutions renting taxable property. Measure 2 leaves to legislative discretion the amount of relief provided. However, the amount provided must not be nomi- nal and must be sufficient reasonably to reduce the burden of the property taxes paid in the form of rent. The legislature may classify renters into classes or subclasses such as according to age or income of the renter or the kind of property, so long as there is a rational basis for the classification. The rent relief may be appropriated from the General Fund or �.. from constitutionally dedicated funds, with the possible excep- tion of the Common School Fund . s s t Opinion 8156 Summary/ 7 VOTER APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW TAXES AND EXCEPTIONS TO THE LIMITATION Questions 41 through 57 relating to Subsection (6) Measure 2 imposes a voter approval requirement for the levy of any new taxes or for any increase in tax or assessment rates which result in an increase in government revenue . This require- which excise, ment applies to any kind of tax (sales, income, pa Y franchise) and is not limited to property taxes and assessments - and voter approval may be obtained only in May Under the me and general or November, on the dates of the statewide primary equivalent 50 percent nt in off years . At least elections or their and a of the registered voters must cast ballots on the question. must approve , Thus in some cases , of �o- majority of those voting not voting so that the 50 nents could defeat a tax proposal by ; 1 equirement is not met . percent participating r s provides a means by which voters may authorize Measure 2 also a would not be subject to the 1112 levy of property taxes which limitation. Voters of a district could exempt all or percent lima tion could be from the limitation. The exemp part of a tax levy for a stated period of time or permanently- practically speaking, because of existing law, the voting of Cwould be permanent; for a levy out- an exemption for a tax base side of a tax base , the exemption would be one year ; for a serial i opinion 8156 Summary/ 8 levy for operations, up to three years; for capital construction, up to ten years . Voter approval of real property tax levies would not be required if the tax levy is within or subject to the 11h percent limitation, unless the levy requires an increase in tax rates and would result in an increase in governmental revenue. Generally speaking, property tax levies are not "new" taxes even if they must be approved, so the 50 percent of the registered voters requirement need not be met unless the levy rate is to be increased, or the governmental body wishes the levy to be exempt from the 11/2 percent limitation. However, a property tax for a new or special purpose , such as for law enforcement purposes or to finance a new building, is a "new", tax and would require voter approval if it will increase governmental revenue. The test for an "increase in governmental revenue" is whether total revenue from all sources will be higher in the year the new or increased tax becomes effective. Thus a tax intended only to replace revenue lost because of Measure 2 would not require voter approval . Since this involves a prediction as to what revenue will be available in a future year, the prediction should be based on a mathematical computation as to what revenues the tax ( will produce and what other revenues will be available, based on present conditions and changes in conditions which it is known F i F Opinion 8156 Summary/ 9 will occur. If conditions change and more revenue is received than was predicted, a tax which was validly adopted does not become invalid retroactively for that reason. Special assessments are levied against property to finance improvements such as streets, sidewalks and sewer systems, based on benefits received by the property. Under Measure 2, all such special assessments would have to be approved by a vote of the people in the entire taxing district, not just those voters in d the area benefited and assessed. =; 4 Any new or increased state taxes, including any state pro- perty tax, would be valid only if approved by a majority of 50 percent of the registered voters in the entire state . This would be true even if all the proceeds of the taxes were paid to local lost because of Measure 2 , since governments to replace revenue such state taxes would increase state governmental revenue even if the state kept none of the money. LIMITATION ON USER CHARGES AND LICENSE FEES Questions 58 through 61 relating to Subsection (7 ) ' Measure 2 prevents government, at the state level on down, from imposing or raising fees in order to make up for revenue lost because of the measure' s limitation. License fees , user fees and services charges could not be increased to finance government services , except to the extent that the fee reflects Opinion 8156 Summary/ 10 C the actual cost of providing the government service. Fees can continue at their current rate even if they exceed actual cost . License fees, user fees and service charges include: business licenses, systems development charges, concession fees, school tuition, filing fees, franchise fees, electric rates, and water and sewer rates . Not included are rental and leasing revenues, liquor prices charged by the Oregon Liquor Control Commission and court fines . SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS Question 62 relating to Subsection (8) Social Security benefits cannot be taxed as "income" under the measure, but they may be considered in determining eligibi- lity for HARRP and other benefits . EFFECTIVE DATE Question 63 relating to Subsection (9 ) Subsections ( 1 ) through (4 ) would go into effect July 1 , 1985 . The remainder of the measure would go into effect on December 6, 1984 . C League of Oregon Cities SAL EM: Local Government Center, 1201 Court Street N.E.,FO Box 928, Salem 97308, Telephone:(503)588-6466 EUGENE: Hendricks Hall, University of Oregon,P.O. Box 3177, Eugene 97403, Telephone:(503)686-5231 TO: All Mayors of Oregon Cities FROM: Edward E. Ferguson, Executive Direct RE: Ballot Measure 2 DATE: September 7, 1984 On November 6, 1984, Cregun will vote again on a property tax rate limit . The state Attorney General has recently released a 265-page opinion relative to Ballot Measure 2 , the 1-1/2i Property Tax Limitation measure. We are forwarding to you the opinion questions and answers in abbreviated format, along with the A.G. 's summary of that opinion. We hope this information will assist you in the assessment of Ballot Measure 2' s impact on both your community and your governmental services. Should you desire a complete copy of the opinion, you will need to contact the Attorney Gener- al 's office in care of Melissa Campbell , Department of Justice, 100 Justice Building, Salem, OR 97310, phone number : 378-4620; a cost of $10 is being charged for each COPY. Along with the opinion, we have enclosed the Legislative Revenue Computer Program, which indicates the measure' s effect on your city' s ability to levy taxes with Ballot Measure 2 passing. Although there appear to be cities which are more adversely impacted than others , I think we can all agree that Ballot Measure 2 would have lasting effects on all cf our cities. I would like to review just a few of these with you. 1 . If Ballot Measure 2 passes, our state government does not have a surplus of revenue to use to bail out local government. In fact , due to the lingering effects of the recession, the state has had to continue ''temporary'' tax increases to balance its last few biennial budgets. It goes without saying that the : tate legislature v.ould be forced into making many implementing decisions for the measure. These are decisions that would place the provi - sion of municipal services in the hands of the state legislature and state- developed assistance programs; local governments would have less of a voice in making those choices. 2. The measure locks into the state Constitution a provision that any increase in or creation of new user fees, license fees or service charges may not be done unless it can be shown that the fees do not exceed the actual cost of providing a service. This includes business licenses; franchise fees; systems development charges; and water, sewer and electric fees. For many of your cities, this will challenge you with the extra burden of analyzing dozens of your services, of which some have unknown quantities when you try to relate them directly to cost. OFFICERS.Ruth Burleigh,commissioner.Bend,presidenN Mayor DIRECTORS.Mayor George Fir craft,Klamath Falls 0 Lynn Hamilton,city manager.La Grande•Mayor Gerald"lou"Hannum,Medford, Alan Berg,Corvallis.vice president•Mayor Elvern Hall,Newberg, Immediete pest president Mary Schamehom.councilor.Bandon•Mildred Schwab,commissioner,Portland a John Shirley,councilor, treasurer•Stephen Bauer.executive director. Salem•Kent Taylor,city manager.Lincoln City Mayor Winston walks,Canyonvilb•Mayor Margaret Weil,Gresham. xxxxxxx Mayors of Oregon Cities September 7, 1984 Page 2 3. For all of your cities , the effects on general obligation bonds are tremen- dous. Should this measure pass, all G.O. bonds , including any special assessments and Bancroft bunds which exceed the rate limitation , must go to the people for a vote. Local improvement districts which we have worked with over the years , tax increment financing for urban renewal , and bond issues for such purposes as fire stations or libraries all will be subject to the limitation and will require a citywide election. 4. When we say that issues will be subject to voter approval , I need to empha- size that the measure galls for 50 percent voter turnout to validate any election for this purpose. This happens in )ur state about every other year in May and November , which, ,s you know, severely limits our options. In add _ ion, there usually is a percentage of registered voters who no longer reside in your district. This means that a turnout of more than 50 percent of the voters would be needed to validate the election. Couple this with those who would merely stay home in order to cast a ''No'' vote, and we have a measure before us that could cripple our cities. 5• The measure also would have lasting effects on our economy . Infrastructure improvements and assistance to developers, such as bringing city services to project sites, would be very difficult to implement. In addition, we would no longer be able to provide basic service levels. Just as devas- tating would be the statewide image we would project to new business looking to locate in Oregon. Any industry interested in a 20+ year commit- ment to our state would want to ensure that that commitment was equally matched in our communities by continued and adequate service on roads, utilities , police, fire, education, etc. In order to discuss this and other ballot measures with your communities, we have tentatively scheduled 14 regional meetings to be held in October-. We hope you will take the opportunity to put one of the following dates on your calendar and have several key people from your city attend. Tentative Regional Meetings Thursday, October 4 The Darles Tuesday, October 16 Newport Friday, October 5 Pendleton Tuesday, October 16 Bandon Monday, October 8 Springfield Monday, October 22 Klamath Falls Tuesday, October 5 Grants Pass Tuesday, October 23 Burns Friday, October 12 Bend Wednesday, October 24 John Day Monday, October 15 Astoria Wednesday, October 24 Baker Monday, October 15 Tillamook Thursday, October 25 Ontario Additional material , including meeting location and time will be mailed to each mayor and city manager- or city recorder shortly. The League sent to you, several weeks ago, a packet of information on Ballot Measure 2 which included the full text of the measure and a couple brief descriptions of the measure. We hope that all of this information will prove useful to you. It is incumbent upon each city to take this information and analyze the measure' s impact on your own community. We urge you to share all of this information with your city councilors and administrators. It goes without saying that a loss of approximately 27 to 42 percent in property taxes statewide will have an adverse affect on the levels of service that we now have in Oregon. i . 1 Mayors of Oregon Cities September 7, 1984 Page 3 For further information, or if you would like someone to speak on the issue in your community outside of the regional meetings which hicwill isbe group of bntethe esteLeague, You may desire to contact the "Oregon Committee, 2. ness , community and public interests formed fight r : 371 Measure7328. In theeinterss est is 875 High Street N.E. . Salem, OR 97301 ; p hone of fairness, I should add that the Oregon Taxpayers Union may be contacted for infor- mation and arguments in favor of Ballot Measure nu 2 Their adressi s S17 S.W. Fourth Street S .W. , Suite 214, Portland, OR 97204• phone if we can be of further assistance to you as we progress toward the election, please let us know. Enclosures Rec . dors cc: City Managers/City i WILLIAM F.GARY DAVE FROHNMAYER DERVTY ATTORNEY GZKZRAL ATTORNEY GENERAL y,D STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF JUMCE Justice Building Salem.Oregon 97310 Telephone:15031 378.4400 August 29, 1984 No. 8156 Summary of Questions and Answers This opinion is issued in response to questions presented by Senate President Edward N. Fadeley and House Speaker Grattan Kerans. FIRST QUESTION PRESENTED What is the relationship between the measure and Article XI , section 11 of the Oregon Constitution? ANSWER GIVEN Both Article XI , section 11 of the Oregon Constitution and the measure are limitations on the taxing authority of taxing units authorized to levy property taxes in the State of Oregon. Both limitations will act simultaneously. Article X1 , section 11 is a dollars and cents limit on the amount of tax that a governmental unitmay vYtThe thatmeasure propertymownersn on the amount of propertyax are required to pay. SECOND QUESTION PRESENTED Does the limitation in subsection (1) (a) apply to the levy of each taxing unit or does it apply to the total amount levied against any parcel of real property? ANSWER GIVEN The limitation applies to the total amount of taxes that each parcel of real property is required to pay. THIRD QUESTION PRESENTED (a) Does the limitation in subsection (1) (a) apply to personal property? (b) If not, could the levy of a taxing unit that exceeds the limitation be applied to the personal property within its taxing jurisdiction? (c) If so, is a vote of the people required? in (d) Also, if l towcentrally assesseddoes the outilities? subsection (1) (a) appppY ANSWER GIVEN (a) No. (b) Without legislative change, the answer is no. However , if the legislature should decide to do otherwise, the answer is yes. (c) Under present law, no. (d) Under present law, both real and personal property must be assessed in the same manner , therefore all property of centrally assessed utilities, both real and personal, would be subject to the limitation. FOURTH QUESTION PRESENTED What does the phrase "amount levied for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1983" mean? Is it the amount of tax levied by a tax, ng district, the total camount levied against a parcel of real prop Y. or the tax rate levied against a parcel? Should this amoint the be taxes oadjusted to excludeanyy chargesronates bondedvied debttinpay 1983- interest and redemptionpercent tax relief paid toehomeowners oes the nin1nclude he 30 1983-84? ANSWER GIVEN The "amount levied for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1983," means the dollar aanereenforamount O4 taxes billed to each parcel of real prp Y 2 without adjustment. It includes amounts for bond principal and interest and the amounts of property tax relief (30 percent) paid by the state on behalf of the property owner. FIFTH QUESTION PRESENTED Is legislative action required to permit a levy of property taxes within the limitation in subsection (1) (a) ? ANSWER GIVEN If the question is directed strictly to the levying of property taxes, the answer is no. However, if the question is directed to the overall working of the limitation contained ,in the proposed measure, the answer is yes. SIXTH QUESTION PRESENTED Does the legislature have authority to apportion taxing authority among districts within subsection (1) (a) ? Does the authority include prohibiting some districts from levying property taxes? ANSWER GIVEN The legislature has authority to apportion taxing authority among districts; this authority encompasses the capacity to prohibit some districts from levying property taxes. SEVENTH QUESTION PRESENTED (PART A) What limits does Acticle I , section 32 (the uniformity clause) of the Oregon Constitution place on the legislature' s authority to apportion taxing authority within the limitation? For example, if the operation of subsection 1 (a) sets a lower maximum consolidated tax rate for some parcels of property than for other parcels in the same combination of taxing districts, must the lower maximum apply to all parcels? ANSWER GIVEN Article I , section 32 of the Oregon Constitution . requires that the tax that each municipal corporation levies must be imposed uniformly, at the same rate, on each class of property within its boundaries. Each k district's tax rate will be limited by the code area in 1 3 { which it is required to levy the lowest rate under the proposed measure. That rate must apply equally to all parcels of real property within the geographical area levied. SEVENTH QUESTION PRESENTED (PART B) If the answer to Question 7A is in the affirmative, does the uniformity clause of the Oregon Constitution apply to the allocation of taxes (levies within subsection (1) (a) ) among the districts in 1985 under subsection (1) (b) of the proposed measure? ANSWER GIVEN Yes. EIGHTH QUESTION PRESENTED Does the measure authorize or require the state to collect a state-wide tax at the maximum rate for apportionment to local government? ANSWER GIVEN The proposed measure neither authorizes nor requires the state to collect a state-wide tax at the maximum rate for apportionment to local government. NINTH QUESTION PRESENTED (a) Does the limitation in subsection 1 (a) apply to the levies certified by taxing districts (before offsets) or to the levies actually extended on the roll (after offsets) ? (b) If the limitation applies to the certified levy, what effect do current statutory offsets, such as Western Oregon Severance Tax receipts, have on the limitation? (c) May the legislature alter current statutory offsets after the effective date of this measure? (d) If so, would a vote of the people be required? (e) Must any offsets remaining after the effective date of the measure be proportionately applied against taxes levied inside and outside the limitation in subsection 1 (a) ? 4 ANSWER GIVEN (a) The limitation applies to the levies actually extended on the roll after offsets -- the tax the real property is required to pay. (b) Current statutory offsets do not directly affect the limitatico except that whatever offsets are given, a municipal co:^,jration may levy that much more ad valorem tax and still keep within the amount that may be permitted to be extended against the real property. (c) Nothing in the measure prohibits the legislature from altering current statutory offsets. (d) No vote of the people would be required to alter offsets. (e) Under present law, the offsets should be proportionately applied against taxes levied inside and outside the limitation. There is nothing that would compel the legislature to continue such a provision. TENTH QUESTION PRESENTED In light of Article VIII, section 3 of the Oregon Constitution, if the measure causes a large decrease in property tax revenues of school districts, does the state have a responsibility to replace any or all of the lost revenues? Does the state have a responsibility to use what state moneys are provided for equalization rather than flat grants? ANSWER GIVEN No, except to the same extent that the legislature may now have a responsibility under existing constitutional provisions to provide alternative financing to a district which cannot meet state standards (or operate at all) because its voters will not approve a levy of the necessary amount. ELEVENTH QUESTION PRESENTED Does the county school fund levy required by ORS 328.005 have a prior claim on any property taxes apportioned to counties? ANSWER GIVEN Yes, unless ORS 328.005 is amended. 5 TWELFTH QUESTION PRESENTED To what taxes does the distribution described in subsection (1) (b) apply: To property taxes collected in 1985-86 or taxes levied in 1985-86? To taxes levied within the limitation in subsection (1) (a) ? To bond Bevies described in subsection 2? To taxes authorized by a vote of the people described in subsection (6) ? To taxes on real property only? ANSWER GIVEN The distribution applies to real and personal property taxes levied for the 1985-86 year within the limitation described in subsection (1) (a) . The limitation does not apply to taxes levied for the payment of bond interest and redemption charges, or taxes authorized by a vote of the people in excess of the limitation provided in subsection (6) . THIRTEENTH QUESTION PRESENTED What does the phrase "in the same proportion as existed for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1983" in subsection 1(b) mean? Does "proportion" refer to the proportions used to distribute the unsegregated tax account in each county, to the proportions either shown or implicit in the tax statements received by each property owner , to the proportion each district's collections or levy bears to all property taxes statewide, or to some other proportion? Can these proportions be adjusted for bond levies, capital construction levies, offsets or state-paid property tax relief extended in 1983-84? How much discretion does the legislature have to define by statute what this proportion is? ANSWER GIVEN "In the same proportion as existed for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1983" means the percentage distribution that is required of all counties under ORS 311. 375 to 311.395 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1983. The adjustments that should be made to the tax distribution percentage schedule for the 1983-84 fiscal year would be to subtract taxes for payment of bonds and interest, certified assessments and other charges (non- ad valorem taxes) and to add any late ad valorem tax levies that did not appear in the tax distribution percentage schedule as provided in ORS 311.390 (2) . 6 f FOURTEENTH QUESTION PRESENTED Does the distribution specified in subsection (1) (b) violate any other provision of the Oregon or United States Constitutions? If so, which provision controls? ANSWER GIVEN Subsection (1) (b) does not violate either constitution. FIFTEENTH QUESTION PRESENTED Assuming the legislature has some discretion to specify the distribution under subsection (1) (b) , in what way is that discretion limited by Article IX,Isection section 32 (the uniformity 3? ause) , Article 1, and Article IX, ANSWER GIVEN The only discretion the legislature has in implementing subsection (1) (b) , is to make the + distribution procedure work more smoothly. The time ` constraints that limit the effective date of tax measures to 90 days after the adjournment of a session will detract from the usefulness of any attempthbL' the legislature to implement subsection (1) (b) . sections of the constitution will not aid the legislature in the implementation of subsection (1) (b) . SIXTEENTH QUESTION PRESENTED if a district did not exist, did not levy taxes or had its certified levy completely funded by offsets in 1983-84, could it levy property taxes in 1985-86? Could it receive property taxes in 1985-86? ANSWER GIVEN If a district did not exist or did not levy taxes or had its certified levy completely funded by offsets in 1983-84, technically it could levy property taxes in 1985-86. However , because the proposed measure requires that the taxes collected under the limitations contained in subsection (1) (a) be distributed in the same proportion as taxes were distributed for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1983 (1983-84 fiscal year) , it could not receive property taxes subject to the limitations 7 contained in subsection (1) of the measure levied in 1985-86. SEVENTEENTH QUESTION PRESENTED Does subsection (1) (b) auLtorize a district to receive and spend property tax revenue even if the district has not met the requirements of Article XI , section 11, ORS chapter 294, or other constitutional or statutory requirements? If not, then what happens to any funds allocated to a district by subsection (1) (b) that the district cannot receive or spend? ANSWER GIVEN Subsection (1) (b) does not authorize a district to do anything. It merely provides for a means of distributing the taxes collected under the subsection (1) (a) limitation for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1985. There are no statutes of which we are aware that restrict a taxing unit from receiving revenues to which it is entitled. If the distribution contained in subsection (1) (b) authorizes a municipal corporation to receive funds, there is no prohibition against that taxing unit receiving them. Article XI, section 11 of the Oregon Constitution is a limitation upon the authority of a taxing unit to levy taxes and is not a prohibition against the receipt or spending of money. ORS 294.305 to 294.565 , the Local Budget Law, does provide that a municipality as defined in that law (which includes most taxing units) may not levy taxes or spend money unless it has prepared a budget as provided in those sections. If funds received under subsection (1) (b) are not budgeted within the municipal corporation' s budget, it would not have the authority to spend those moneys, and would be required to hold them until some budget authorizes their expenditure. EIGHTEENTH QUESTION PRESENTED If a district levied a tax in 1983-84 , but through consolidation or dissolution, does not exist in 1985-86, what happens to the district' s proportional distribution? ANSWER GIVEN if a district is consolidated or merged with another district or districts, the surviving consolidated or merged district would be entitled to receive both districts' portion of the distribution 8 f under subsection (1) (b) . The measure does not provide for the distribution of unclaimed revenue. If a district is dissolved, that district' s portion of the taxes should be redistributed among the remaining districts in the proportion of the 1983 adjusted distribution schedule. NINETEENTH QUESTION PRESENTED What are "redemption charges"? Is repayment of principal a redemption charge? ANSWER GIVEN Interest and redemption charges are the sums due in order to avoid default on obligations to pay money on bonded indebtedness. TWENTIETH QUESTION PRESENTED What is "bonded indebtedness"? Does it include debts other than those secured by municipal bonds, such as pension obligations? If not, does this measure have any impairment of contract problems? ANSWER GIVEN Bonded indebtedness is government debt exemplified by bonds backed by the government' s pledge to levy ad valorem property taxes if need be to pay off the bonds. The measure does pose potential impairment of contract issues. TWENTY-FIRST QUESTION PRESENTED What does the term "authorized" mean: For state general obligation bonds? For local general obligation bonds? For state revenue bonds? For local revenue bonds? For Bancroft bonds? For tax increment bonds? ANSWER GIVEN Generally, "authorized" means empowered by a legislative-type act to sell bonds for a particular purpose. TWENTY-SECOND QUESTION PRESENTED What is the latest date that bonds can be authorized to qualify for the exemption contained in subsection (2) ? Does "this amendment" mean this 9 subsection or the entire measure? Must all property taxes levied to retire general obligation bonds authorized after this date be within the limitation in subsection 1 (a) ? ANSWER GIVEN July 1, 1985 is the latest date that bonds can be authorized to qualify subsequent tax levies for subsection (2) ' s exemption. However, such authorization after subsection (6) becomes effective on December 6, 1984 (if the measure passes) would have to comply with the requirements of subsection (6) to the extent applicable. TWENTY-THIRD AND THIRTY-SIXTH QUESTIONS PRESENTED What is the effect of the limitation in subsection (1) (a) on tax increment financing? How would the exemption for bonds authorized by the effective date of the measure apply to outstanding tax increment bonds? Future bonds of existing districts? Bonds of new tax increment districts? What is the effect of the reduction and limitation in assessed value in subsections (3) and (4) on the repayment of outstanding tax increment bonds? ANSWER GIVEN This measure, if adopted, will affect tax increment financing extensively. It may be held that the purchasers of tax increment bonds make their purchases subject to the possibilty that a subsequent generally applicable statute or constitutional provision will reduce the amount of levy available for the payment of their bonds. Such a holding could result in default on at least some tax increment bonds unless the state makes other funds available. A more likely holding would be that bondholders are contractually and therefore constitutionally entitled to availability of tax funds (to pay off bonds) on the difference between frozen value and actual true cash value of property in project areas, without reduction to 1981 basis. Taxing districts would not receive taxes on the full frozen value but only on the remainder, if any, after bondholders are satisfied. If the 1981 basis valuation is less than the difference between frozen value and actual value, bondholders would be 10 r constitutionally entitled to a tax on the amount (that is, the difference between frozen value and actual value) even if property is thereby subject to tax on a greater value than the limit set by this measure. Bonds sold after the effective date of the measure would be subject to it, and bonding capacity thereby would be greatly reduced or even eliminated. TWENTY-FOURTH QUESTION PRESENTED Does inclusion of "specie! assessments" imply that special assessments authorizF:1 after the measure becomes effective must fit within the 1 1/2 percent limitation? ANSWER GIVEN No. TWENTY-FIFTH QUESTION PRESENTED (a) What is the definition of "assessed value" as used in subsection (1) (a) and (3) ? (b) Does the five percent assessed value limit that existed in 1981 under Oregon Laws 1979, chapter 241, section 32 have any effect on this value? ANSWER GIVEN (a) "Assessed value" is the value placed by the county assessor on the assessment and tax rolls as of January 1, 1981, by virtue of Oregon Laws 1979 , chapter 241, section 32 (3) , as adjusted by any applicable increases of 2 percent or less for any intervening year since 1981. (b) Yes. Whenever the state-wide true cash value is in excess of 105 percent of the previous year' s state-wide assessed value of locally assessed property, the resulting ratio or factor required to be certified by the Department of Revenue to the county assessors could result in further lowering the existing assessed value of any parcel of real property whose true cash value remained the same or declined from the previous year. TWENTY-SIXTH QUESTION PRESENTED C (a) If the assessed value originally shown on the 1981 tax roll were subsequently adjusted, either by 11 correction or as the result of an appeal, should the assessed values under the measure be calculated based on the original or adjusted values? (b) Does it matter if the adjustments occur before or after the effective date of the measure? (c) If property were erroneously omitted from the rolls in 1981, can it be added? (d) If property were valued erroneously in 1981 and the time for adjustment has passed, should the assessed values under this measure be based on the uncorrected or the corrected 1981 value? ANSWER GIVEN (a) The 1981 assessed value should be based on the adjusted values. (b) No. The legislature can pass laws after the effective date of the measure further to facilitate the assessment adjustment process. (c) Yes. (d) The assessed value under the measure should be based on the uncorrected value. The legislature, however , could pass legislation extending the time for adjustment. TWENTY-SEVENTH QUESTION PRESENTED (a) What effect does the calculation of assessed value in subsections (3) and (4) have on the five percent average assessment growth limit? (b) What value would a parcel of real property carry if its true cash value or its assessed value under the current system were lower than the proposed assessed value? (c) Must the legislature continue to consider market value (true cash value) in setting property values? (d) May the legislature establish values to be the market value or the value under this measure, whichever is lower? 12 ANSWER GIVEN (a) The five percent limitation on growth in assessed property value locally state-wideSs3sthat found in OR09160continuestooperate regardless of the ratio certified by the Department o Revenue to the county assessor under that law, increase in assesed exceed twonpercentiofatheaprevious real property ca year' s assessed value. fib) The parcel would carry the value which comports with ORS 308.232 and 309.160, provided that there were no intervening increases in assessed value exceeding two percent of the previous year' s assessed value. The measure does not excettato imposedthelue be any particular minimum amount Pfor January 1, 1981 assessed value as the ceiling trict any applicable increases assessed value and to res in that assessed value to not more than tw°undereover the the previous year s assessed value. Thus,1d by the measure r ver assumed facts, the higheSeea would be inapplue Question31e (c) No, Legislative power is plenary and subject ( l tutions. The only to the state and federan fiproperty t xation legislature can adopt any systemru within the class that operates uniformly on all subjects and is not otherwise protect;ontofyor in the law.violation of due process or equal P ed, under the matter what system of taxation is develop measure the resulting ass value plusessed eany nnot exceed the a applicable January 1, 1981 percent or less for increases in assessed value of two each succeeding year. (d) Yes. TWENTY-EIGHTH QUESTION PRESENTED (a) What is the effect of the measure on outright exemptions, partial exemptions, special property assessments, anfootherr valuereduc ty taxation?ns or exemptions allowed by la P (b) Can the legislature repeal an exemption or special assessment for a property that enjoyed one in 1981? 13 (c) If so, how is the exempt or specially assessed property to be valued when it returns to the regular tax roll? (d) May existing exemptions or special treatments be granted to additional properties or may new exemptions be created after the effective date of the measure? ANSWER GIVEN The legislature may repeal existing exemptions, partial exemptions, special assessments or other reductions or exemptions from ad valorem taxation now allowed by law, or it may create new exemptions and special assessment provisions. If property now exempt becomes subject to taxation by repeal of the exemption or by change of use, the basis for the tax limitation would be the value at which the property would have been assessed in 1981 had it then been subject to taxation, plus any applicable maximum two percent increases for the intervening years, or current assessed value if lower than that amount. Property subject to reduced value special use assessment in 1981 would remain subject to taxation on the basis of its 1981 special use assessed value if the pertinent law is repealed or the property becomes disqualified. TWENTY-NINTH QUESTION PRESENTED (a) How is property assessed for special use to be valued while specially assessed? (b) How will the additional taxes and penalties on disqualification for special assessment be computed? ANSWER GIVEN (a) Property assessed for special purposes in 1981 would continue to be assessed at the special purpose value shown on the 1981 assessment and tax roll, plus appropriate increases at not more than two percent, in the same manner as any other property. Property qualifying for special use assessment after 1981 will be assessed at the lower of the 1981 assessed value plus indexing , or at its actual special use value in the particular year . (b) If the additional amount payable upon disqualification of land for a special use assessment is termed a tax as in ORS 308.395 (1) , it is impossible to 14 predict with certainty whether this would be held to be an ad valorem tax exceeding (when added to the tax for the given year) the 1 1/2 percent limitation and thus unconstitutional; or in the nature of a penalty and therefore collectible because not an ad valorem tax. A reasonable argument can be made that the "tax" is not an ad valorem tax because of the manner of its computation and because the framers of the measure did not intend to create a windfall not based on special use. If the disqualification is called a penalty, (e.g_, ORS 308.395 (2) (c) ) , it may be collected. On land under special assessment in 1981, there would probably be no added taxes because the property cannot, by reason of t.1e special assessment, be assessed higher than the 1981 special assessment value. THIRTIETH QUESTION PRESENTED What effect does the measure have on: (a) The small tract optional timber tax values? (b) The current method of valuing timberland in Western and Eastern Oregon? ANSWER GIVEN (a) With respect to forest land classified under ORS 321.705 to 321 .765, the assessed value shown on the assessment and tax roll for January 1, 1981, establishes the constitutional ceiling for assessments in future years under the measure regardless of whether use of the land changes. Such values may be reduced in accordance with ORS 321.745 and may be increased up to two percent each year for any increase in value over the prior year' s assessed value. Upon declassification, severance taxes may be imposed since they are not an ad valorem tax and are not subject to the measure. Whether the other amounts imposed upon declassification can be collected depends upon whether they are deemed to be an ad valorem tax and subject to the 1 1/2 percent limitation. Property under special assessment in 1981 which is declassified would not be subject to additional assessments because the special assessment could not be increased over the 1981 amount. See Questions 28 and 29 . (b) For property subject to the forest land assessment laws (other than the Western Oregon small tract optional tax lands) the assessed value shown on the assessment and tax roll for January 1, 1981, 15 establishes the constitutional ceiling for assessments in future years under the measure regardless of whether use of the land changes. That value may be increased up to two percent each year for any increases in value over the prior year' s assessed value. Timber severance taxes are also applicable and are not subject to the measure. Whether additional taxes are payable upon declassification depends upon whether the taxes are considered ad valorem taxes and subject to the 1 1/2 percent limitation and whether the property was under the special assessment classification in 1981. See Questions 28 and 29 . THIRTY-FIRST QUESTION PRESENTED (a) In what year may the two percent indexing of property values be commenced? (b) Is the indexing compounded or straight line? ANSWER GIVEN (a) 1982. (b) It is compounded, provided that the assessed value for each intervening year since 1981 under existing law increases at least two percent over the prior year' s assessed value. See discussion for examples. THIRTY-SECOND QUESTION PRESENTED What effect do the assessed value limits have on the constitutional and statutory maximum bonding limits for state and local general obligations bonds? ANSWER GIVEN The assessed value limits imposed by the measure would have no legal effect on bonding capacity of state and local governments as measured by the true cash value of taxable property within the taxing entity. As a practical matter, the assessed value limitation coupled with the 1 1/2 percent levy limitation would, except as to general obligation bonded indebtedness authorized by July 1, 1985 , severely erode state and local government' s ability to back issuance of brands with ad valorem tax revenue and could make marketing of new bonds more difficult and expensive. 16 ( THIRTY-THIRD QUESTION PRESENTED Which of the following changes would cause property to be revalued in total or in part? (a) addition to existing building (b) remodel (c) rehabilitation (d) sewer service (e) street paving (f) subdividing or partitioning (g) rezoning (h) change in use ANSWER GIVEN Revaluation of property may be appropriate at any { time there is new construction on the property. What will constitute "newly constructed property" under the measure will have to be determined by legislative action. Under certain circumstances involving new construction, zone changes may result in revaluation of property. For changes in use resulting in loss of an exemption, the property would be assessed at the January 1, 1981 assessed value it would have had before the exemption plus any appropriate maximum two percent use adjustments. If the property is under a special assessment and the law is repealed or the property becomes disqualified, the property remains subject to the ceiling on assessed value on the basis of its January 1, 1981 special use assessed value plus appropriate maximum two percent adjustments. See Question 28 . THIRTY-FOURTH QUESTION PRESENTED On what basis should newly constructed property, built after 1981, be appraised if it includes a brand new technical development? ANSWER GIVEN This is an appraisal problem. It would probably be compared to some similar type of property which existed 17 in 1981. By comparing the current relationships of the new property with the property that was in existence in 1981, a comparative value factor can be computed. Multiplyinj the 1981 value of the long-existing property by the factor would give a theoretical 1981 value to which would be added the percentage growth permitted under the proposed amendment. THIRTY-FIFTH QUESTION PRESENTED On what basis should property added to the roll between January 1, 1981, and January 1, 1986, or added to the roll in 1986, be valued under this measure? ANSWER GIVEN The property should be assessed at the January 1, 1981 assess?d value the property would have had it then been on the roll, plus any applicable maximum two percent adjustments. THIRTY-SEVENTH QUESTION PRESENTED Does subsection (5) require the legislature to continue any existing property tax relief program for renters? For homeowners? ANSWER GIVEN Subsection (5) requires the legislature to provide property tax relief for all renters of real property but does not restrict the legislature to the terms of existing programs for renters or homeowners. THIRTY--EIGHTH QUESTION PRESENTED Is there is any minimum amount of renter relief required by subsection (5) ? Does subsection (5) require relief for commercial or agricultural users? ANSWER GIVEN As to the first question, the amount which is provided cannot be de minimis; it must be an amount that can be said realistically to-reimburse the renter for some portion of taxes paid indirectly through the payment of rent, but without the necessity of full reimbursement. Yes, as to the second question. 18 i THIRTY-NINTH QUESTION PRESENTED Can renter relief required by subsection (5) be paid from a fund dedicated by the Oregon Constitution to some other purpose (such as the Highway Fund) ? ANSWER GIVEN Yes. FORTIETH QUESTION PRESENTED Could the legislature limit renter relief to certain age or income groups? ANSWER GIVEN The legislature may not deny renter relief to certain age or income groups, but could vary the amount of relief given to certain age or income groups by virtue of its ability to create constitutionally permissible classifications for the purpose. FORTY-FIRST QUESTION PRESENTED Does subsection (6) allow taxing districts to levy property taxes in excess of the limitation in subsection 1 (a) if the voters so approve? ANSWER GIVEN Yes. FORTY-SECOND QUESTION PRESENTED Do the voter approval requirements of subsection (6) apply to the following tax situations: (a) a property tax levy within a district' s tax base but in excess of the amount within the limitation in subsection (1) (a) allocated to it by the legislature? (b) A measure authorizing a district to levy property taxes (either a new tax base or a levy outside a base) within the limitation in subsection (l) (a) ? (c) A statute imposing a state-wide property tax within the limitation in subsection (1) (a) , if the statute also reduces the amount local districts can levy C within the limitation? 19 (d) Local or state-wide property tax levies or other tax measures designed to replace revenue lost by passage of this measure? (e) A measure that increases revenue over what would have existed without the measure, but that does not increase a government' s total revenue when compared to the prior fiscal period? (f) A measure that does not increase governmental revenue in the next fiscal period, but can be expected to increase it in the future? (g) A measure that continues at the same level a tax rate that by law is scheduled to decrease? (h) A measure disconnecting or reconnecting state income taxes to the federal tax code? (i) A measure expanding the items subject to a tax by repealing exemptions? By expanding the definition of taxable items? By creating a separate tax on untaxed items that is substantially identical to an existing tax on other items? (j) An amendment to the Oregon Constitution authorizing a new tax, increasing an existing tax, or exempting some tax actions from the provisions of subsection (6) ? (k) A statute enacting a new tax or increasing an existing tax that is a companion measure to a constitutional amendment? (L) An amendment to the Oregon Constitution authorizing an increase in general obligation bonded indebtedness? If not, could the state levy property taxes outside the limitation in subsection (1) (a) to repay this debt without a further vote of the people? (m) A measure authorizing a local government to incur additional general obligation debt? If so, could a property tax be levied to repay this debt outside the limitation in subsection (1) (a) without a further vote of the people? If not, must any property tax levy needed to repay this debt be within the limitation in subsection (1) (a) ? (n) Legislation authorizing local governments to impose new taxes or increase existing taxes? 20 (o) A statute imposing a new tax or raising an existing tax where the proceeds are distributed to local government? ANSWER GIVEN (a) Yes. (b) Yes, if such action would cause an increase in governmental revenues. See discussion and answer to (e) . (c) Probably yes. (d) No for local levies, probably yes for state levies. (e) No. (f) A measure which at the time it is adopted can reasonably be expected to increase governmental revenue if present conditions continue is subject to subsection (6) , whether or not it does so. A measure which can reasonably be expected not to increase governmental revenue under present conditions is not subject to subsection (6) . Expected changes in present conditions which are not reasonably certain to occur, which would change the result if they do occur , need not be considered. (g) No. (h) No, for a disconnection. Probably no, for a reconnection. (i) No, for a measure repealing exemptions or expanding the definition of taxable items, unless the changes fundamentally change the nature or application of the tax. Yes, for a measure creating a separate tax on untaxed items substantially identical to a tax on other items. (j) No. (k) Yes, unless exempted by the constitutional amendment. (L) No. A state levy to repay such a debt would be subject to subsection (6) , unless exempted by the constitutional amen9ment. ( 21 (m) No, but a levy to repay such a debt would be subject to subsection (6) . (n) No, but taxes imposed or increased under such authorization would be subject to subsection (6) . (o) Yes. FORTY-THIRD QUESTION PRESENTED (PART A) What is the definition of "special assessment" as used in subsection (6) ? Is it the same as the definition in subsection (2) ? How is a special assessment different from a "fee and charge" as used in subsection (7) ? How is a special assessment different from an "ad valorem" tax as used in subsection (1) ? ANSWER GIVEN A special assessment is a charge based upon a theory of special benefits for the property taxed, levied upon the property benefited, and not a personal liability of the taxpayer. The term would ordinarily be deemed to have the same meaning as in subsection (2) , but in this measure subsection (2) uses the term as a misnomer for "special ad valorem tax." See Question 24. A special assessment differs from a "fee or charge" under subsection (7) in that the assessment is imposed upon property regardless of any actions by the occupant or owner , based upon theoretical benefit rather than actual benefit or use. A special assessment by definition is not based upon value of the property. FORTY-THIRD QUESTION PRESENTED (PART B) What is the definition of "revenue" as used in subsection (6) ? ANSWER GIVEN "Revenue" means the gross receipts and receivables of a governmental unit derived from taxes, licenses, fees and from all other sources. FORTY-FOURTH QUESTION PRESENTED Do special assessments for repayment of Bancroft or other assessment bonds cause an increase in governmental revenue? Must these special assessments be voted on by the people under subsection (6) ? 22 ANSWER GIVEN Yes, assuming that there is no offsetting decrease in other governmental revenues. FORTY-FIFTH QUESTION PRESENTED For infrastructure services (sewer , water , streets) necessary to attract economic development, which are now normally financed by special assessments against benefited property, would subsection (6) require a majority voter approval before applying such charges? In the case of a local improvement district within a city, what area would vote on the issue? If voter approval is required, what is the effect in an L.I .D. where there are no registered voters? ANSWER GIVEN Yes, assuming there is no offsetting decrease in other governmental revenues. Voters of the entire city, county or other taxing unit would vote on the measure, and not merely the voters (if any) residing in the area benefited and subject to the assessment. FORTY-SIXTH QUESTION PRESENTED How would subsection (6) affect the ability of voters in a city or county to authorize a local improvement district or special service district serial levy or assessment? ANSWER GIVEN Subsection (6) would impose a requirement in addition to those already specified by law. FORTY-SEVENTH QUESTION PRESENTED Would subsection (6) affect the ability of cities to impose systems development charges? Would voter approval be required to do so? ANSWER GIVEN A "systems development charge" may be imposed by local legislation in such a manner that it constitutes a special assessment or a tax, in which case compliance with subsection (6) would be required, or as a fee for services or user charge, in which case subsection (6) c 23 would not apply but compliance with subsection (7) would be required. FORTY-EIGHTH QUESTION PRESENTED Would subsection (6) affect the ability of districts to issue revenue bonds? Would voter approval be required to do so? ANSWER GIVEN No. Voter approval would not be necessary. FORTY-NINTH QUESTION PRESENTED What effect would subsection (6) have on "systems development taxes"? ANSWER GIVEN Such systems development taxes, if they are in fact taxes, would be subject to subsection (6) . FIFTIETH QUESTION PRESENTED Does subsection (6) grant authority to local districts to impose taxes beyond state statutory limits if the voters approve? ANSWER GIVEN No. FIFTY-FIRST QUESTION PRESENTED What is a "legal voter"? Does subsection (6) require a 50 percent turnout for the entire election or that 50 percent of the legal voters actually vote on the question? If a measure fails to get a 50 percent turnout but gets enough "yes" votes such that the measure would have passed even if all the voters needed to get a 50 percent turnout voted "no," would the measure take effect? ANSWER GIVEN A legal voter is a person eligible and registered to vote on the day of the election. Subsection (6) requires 50 percent of the "legal voters" to actually vote on the question, not merely in the election. Under terms of the measure, if only 49 percent of the legal 24 voters vote on the measure, it is defeated even if all of the voters vote "yes." FIFTY-SECOND QUESTION PRESENTED What is the "question" referred to in subsection (6) (b) ? Is it a separate question from the question of actually imposing or increasing a tax or special assessment, or exceeding or increasing the limitation in Article XI , sec 11 of the Oregon Constitution? Are taxing units required or permitted to vote on these two questions separately? If not, does approval of a property tax levy that meets the requirements of subsection (6) make the entire approved levy outside the limitation in subsection (1) (a) ? If there can be two questions, may the voters approve a permanent higher tax rate or district-wide total level of special assessments, even if the taxes are not actually levied or the special assessments are on different properties from year to year? ANSWER GIVEN The question referred to in subsection (6) (b) is s whether the taxing un4.t shall levy the particular tax or special assessment, or increase the rate of the tax or special assessment. The measure does not require it to be stated separately from the underlying question as to adopting the levy, tax base or special assessment. Approval of a levy otherwise sulject to subsection (1) in accordance with the requirements of subsection (6) makes the entire approved levy outside the requirements of subsection (1) , if the question is presented to the voters so stating. However, the voters may be asked to approve a levy only part of which would be outside the limitation of subsection (1) . The voters may authorize a continuinq higher property tax levy or tax rate by approving a new tax base (subject to future subsection (6) approval of levy rate increases within the tax base, if otherwise necessary) or for the term of a serial levy. Other tax measures may be approved for a specific period or permanently. Approval of a tax measure for a specific period under subsection (6) may also have continuing effect in the sense that if the approved levy ! is collected it will establish a new level of governmental revenue which must again be exceeded if future levies or assessments are to be subject to { subsection (6) . A serial levy approved pursuant to subsection (6) may be collected in any year for which such voter approval has been obtained notwithstanding that it is not levied or collected for a previously 25 approved year. The voters may approve only particular me tax levies or special on (6) , and may nts for otcapprove ified l (for periods under subsection (6) , purposes of subsection (6) ) future levies their votesunders which are not substantively imposed by subsection (6) . FIFTY-THIRD QUESTION PRESENTED May the voters approve a measure under subsection (6) that does not specify a tax rate, but instead allows the rate to be whatever is required to raise a given can this amount of revenue? If a measure un subsection (6) May the vote approve for an unlimited amount of time? ANSWER GIVEN Voters may approve a levy under subsection (6) to bt te tax rat raise aspta1=aiseiedathatmountamountvmustof reenue�beuest)imated ands necessary stated. Approval may be granted for that amount to be larger (pursuant to a stated formula) in future years of the levy, but if that would require an increase (not now determinable) in the rate of levy to raise that amount in any future year , that increase would ere require limit additional subsection (6) approval. roved under on the time for which a measure can be app subsection (6) . FIFTY-FOURTH QUESTION PRESENTED How specifically must the "reasons" for a tax or special assessment eoflo-i be subsectionc (6j?ed to comply with the requirements ANSWER GIVEN The "reasons" given for the new tax or special assessment must be specific enough fairly to describe the taxing unit' s purpose for the tax action, and may provide additional governmental range from "to P " governmental services," or even to provide general services," to "finance construction of sewer lines in the Greenwood Heights II subdivision." rIFTY-FIFTH QUESTION PRESENTED Does the "amount of revenue it is intended to produce" requirement in paragraph (6) (b) create any 26 f limitation on the actual amount that can be raised after the measure passes? ANSWER GIVEN No, if the amount stated is a good-faith estimate of the amount that a levy at such a rate would produce. If it can be shown that the governing body intentionally or negligently misstated that amount, validity of voter approval might be subject to question. FIFTY-SIXTH QUESTION PRESENTED If a measure was not intended to increase revenue and therefore was not put to a vote of the people under subsection (6) , but after taking effect actually increases revenue, is the measure still in effect? ANSWER GIVEN Yes, assuming that the expectation that the measure would not contribute to an increase in total governmental revenue was reasonable, based on conditions ® existing at the time the measure was enacted. l FIFTY-SEVENTH QUESTION PRESENTED If the state-wide primary or general election dates were changed, could the election dates specified in paragraph (6) (c) be changed without amending paragraph (6) (c) ? ANSWER GIVEN No. FIFTY-EIGHTH QUESTION PRESENTED What are "license fees, user fees, or service charges" in subsection (7) ? Do they include: (a) business licenses? (b) systems development charges? (c) airport landing, wharfage and dockage fees? (d) concession fees? (e) rental and leasing revenues? 27 t f f (f) school tuitions? (g) liquor prices charged by the OLCC? (h) filing fees? (i) court fines? (j) franchise fees? (k) electric rates? (L) water and sewer rates? ANSWER GIVEN (a) Yes. (b) Yes. (c) Yes. (d) No. (e) No. (f) Yes. (g) No. (h) Yes. (i) No. (j) Yes. (k) Yes. (L) Yes. r FIFTY-NINTH QUESTION PRESENTED What does the phrase "actual expense of the service or the cost of administering the regulation for which the fee or charge is levied" mean? Does it include: (a) "overhead" costs? (b) recovery of capital improvement costs or restoration payments within a government budget through rents or by other means? 28 (c) recovery of capital improvement costs and payment of interest through systems development charges, or sewer or water fees? (d) payments to a reserve for future capital improvement, maintenance, or replacement? (e) in-lieu-of tax payments by publicly owned utilities to local governments? (f) highway and park construction, reconstruction, or maintenance costs funded by vehicle registration fees? (g) coverage ratios or reserves used in revenue bond retirement? Does subsection (7) limit the use of inadvertent "profits" of government-owned enterprise activities? ANSWER GIVEN (a) Yes. (b) Yes. (c) Yes. (d) Yes. (e) Yes. (f) Subsection (7) does not apply to such fees. (g) Yes. Subsection (7) does not limit the use of inadvertent "profits" of government-owned enterprise activities. SIXTIETH QUESTION PRESENTED (a) Does subsection (7) apply to all existing fees and charges? (b) Does subsection (7) apply to existing fees and charges which are increased subsequent to the effective date of the amendment? l 29 ANSWER GIVEN (a) No. (b) Yes. SIXTY-FIRST QUESTION PRESENTED Doe,. subsection (7) allow a fee or charge to be spread over all users to cover the cost of facility expansion to new users? Does subsection (7) require that each fee or charge within a governmental program not exceed a separately calculated "cost of service," or is it sufficient that the total charges do not exceed the total program costs? Does subsection (7) require that a single fee or charge reflect the different costs that may be associated with providing the same service to differer.' users? ANSWER GIVEN A fee or charge including the cost of expansion of the service to new users may be imposed on all users. There need not be separate fees within a service to reflect separate aspects of the service, nor need there be separately calculated fees to reflect the cost of providing the same service to different users. SIXTY-SECOND QUESTION PRESENTED Does subsection (8) of the measure in any way affect or limit the use of Social Security income in calculating taxpayer benefits for programs such as HARRP and Elderly Rental Assistance? ANSWER GIVEN No. HARRP and Elderly Rental Assistance are not state or local taxation and, therefore, are not affected by subsection (8) . SIXTY-THIRD QUESTION PRESENTED When does the measure go into effect? ANSWER GIVEN Subsections (1) through (4) would go into effect July 1, 1985. The remainder of the measure would go into effect on December 6 , 1984. 30 W 1, U 1 + H I 1 CJ J M N H h1 y r, O CO .D H-r LL 1 1 CO h 0 c LA CJ h IIt 1!1 .-1 I(1 N CJ J Ji 1 10 J ICI N .D CJ P _ O 1 0, I N h N .D h h 0. P N h O P h co Ln rJ P t� O CJ > CK 't r Gsl W > Cl C 1 J 1 H 1 r i 1 a H 1 -J _ CJ P P H P q CO H I lfl ICI O M O ti .D O N O �O O O ' 1 rJ �O P P ICI s O M O J P .C1 J C: �D M W U 11/l O h h J N M W P .(! O J h C'1 co N J ti L'1 Cn N U) C, CJ M S H f 0 1.0 N CD N r M .J-r P 1!1 O h v O 4 .N-. h CJ C.1 HY 1 H CJ rn a MC>1 H N 1 CT W J 1 1 O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 W R M Q W 3-- Ix Is W F� .+ h M fJ ICI 0 h J P O N IA N M M N I W I tn P O r- d h P M LA CO P J M •-. LD M 1111 ul 0. M J o I/1 LA tp W 1 w 1 N P Ill M �0 w ., w I W I N d r- ~ M O ti O lCl H .-r L11 1 a 1 J .D In P to M N J W I W I ICI 1 O Ln / O J N to .O h O In .M-1 In G� J) M W > I W 1 N .D I M I(1 .D Ill 1 W 1LL 1 ^ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 SDH 1 1 LrIV1 t 1 Ci"C 1 1 PO 1 1 l9 1 1 OZ I t-X i O 1 Mho .TOS —00, .-.0-+ r-c7rn 0 P,n OA Ln O.Dd .DPIn HNM obo S--.VI .+o T -.ui c c�o� Lrl, r�tla� r M mNc� o-+In 4d 1"C 1 N^O P P PrDr� hM0 .D cull.� O O O•c KlN-. h•+.-. 0 Vl C`;-..h C^ C^ Mr�l c� r�Lf1'I ulr.l.0 I(1-.•.L [JJC, "'n.- [Jtfli rl =1- W 11-1 Ntft- h h C=; .-.N1 D =1 H.DrV .-.Cl•H P P J!-+h P P N U.-cJ Or�IJ rJC!u JO.0 �T lllr/' wr^rll H 1 1 ^ ••^• •• •• PJrn ^.rr�. to-+rn Ir'�•n lCl,nH 1-> I Ll 1 CDCDID b .0 .Dill-. .Dtft-. ul IA hOa7 h h .phJ POC^ 'I Ill 1I1 boC� .-+ � ��rrr .C, cr :n Cr ocn r 1� Lf, In r'7 W1(''1�.:J:! .-. ti InCJG NHS •-� ."1 MJF M M •T, .Ll1P W >I J 1 NMJi t0 O .r H h h In1P ^'� ^ J' .D JLf1U J J .G•-.4! '� `�'.r! . W I N I H H fJ�M MN.p .�N� •+ H p Q 1 Q 1 O O M rn '"I "� .-r CO 1 1 J 11 1 C? M 1 1 1 CO 1 1 M P 1 1 O � 1 1 1 O t 3 I Nh0 WOLn OCOm NOCJ .TOJ .Dh hOh In.nH JPM tONO SOS M.+d JOS MCDCO .Do.D NPH ICIIDO SNJI r—_ OHH W IQ lhl�ln co co .O CEJ OMM .ti .-. PLl1J h h MNG .DNP ^J^. m C'J C(I-.P h h NM:.'1 ^'rCIL PR.t'V SCJ to�cJ hLll rl HtnO P-+.+ hNP .D .D MnH P P MLI .p.DN tnca m CO 41-..0 J J Hh G. Mr��Ll1 Ln M:.^ WGO C^o0 I h 1 NCJ-+ M M .rtn Co!nM V N JOtn N N Ohh POO L1101--r J J `DOJ) M M JMh Nom^ N•1-n rCM NHS hgllll O•DJ) 1 L/t^NO N N .pN10 hHP N N JSCO ICI tf1 PN.-r .DIlIN hl/lM H tnln ter"j I W I r-- J J o o .+JPO 111111H o o CC/^.O W OS o MJG clPr� a`1MN N M H 1 Ir; ~ N N .-r N N H M J H H LA"- MNG N N ;UIkt, H IUI 1 1 1 / 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 N H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H r- r f 1- r ► ► r r r- r CnJ t/IJ QNJ .40-1 CCF" 00-j QInJ 4(Mi 41AJ 4tn_i QCI-i QUID dcn j QCnJ iCInJ 4NJ QUIJ QMJ 41nJ 4fnJ Cy(=IQ COQ 0:C14 COd COQ COQ Cl7d COQ tYOd COQ CO<c am< COQ Cr']Q D.rIQ CGld Cc,d Cnq [C!-l•C t1(-'Id W-''- W2h- a00 dG0 a00 I1C0 aU0 400 a00 dU0 0.00 600 Mc;o M60 0.60 cc:0 a00 400 EL- CLGO CLCD MOO 06.1"' 0.- Oml•- OC4r Omr OCDH Owl— Om/- Om/- oculi Dull- Om/- OCLC- Ob r OWr- OWl- OWh- 0.41- Owe ow- 0 g g cn - S Y m P~i U = J L4 o U O H �.. l.1 O N U O x In O Y Y U H N �. Y N to O U x H V M U r- > N >O LLJ An..1 ePl1 N P OC M J M U.r r 7 U 0 U C J O V M � H C, .Mi O N W . Z.. C /n J = F Z a OP H Yh W W < pN� O N xa( 3 C Q a-1 N to N C >.4 cc W O < 4Z W O O Q H O An 3 3 x to F C U H0 3 f0 m u O LL t9 x 'L N xa N 2 f II t Simulated 1983-84 s Estimated 1985-86 Revenue Impact of Measure Two The following table provides a simulation of the revenue impact of BM #2 for the 1983-84 year and a projection of the revenue impact of BM #2 for the 1985-86 year. It was prepared by the Oregon Department of Revenue and Legislative Revenue offices. The 1983-84 simulation was prepared because it is the latest year for which data is available to make comparisons between the current tax system and BM #2. The 1985-86 projection was prepared because that is the first year BM #2 will be in effect if it passes. The following explains the meaning of the numbers in each of the five columns of the table. Column 1 The amount of each district 's 1983-84 operating levy, bond levy and total levy under the current tax system. Column 2 The amount of revenue that each district would have received in 1983-84 for operating, bond and total revenue purposes using the proportionate revenue distribution procedures required for the first year under BM #2. Column 3 The difference between Column 1 and Column 2; i .e. , the loss created by BM #2. Column 4 The amount of revenue that each district would have received in 1983-84 for operating purposes usinq an allocated revenue distri- bution procedure comparable to the allocated tax rate. For the moment , to avoid confusion please disregard this column. The measure appears to have created problems of uniformity amongst tax code areas. Column 4 is an attempt to address this problem through a formula. Column 5 The projected amount of local revenue for operating purposes for 1985-86 for each district under BM #2. In the event that the information does not adequately reflect your situation, please call Dick Townsend at the League so that we might contact the state agencies respon- sible for the tabulations. l O'DONNELL. DATE September 18, 1984 SULLIVAN Q RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW Robert Jean, Tigard City Administrator 1717 N w HOYT STREET 10 PORTLAND OREGON 97209 15031222-4402 FROM Adrianne Brockman RE November Tax Base Election _ You have asked: Does the December 6, 1984 effective date of Ballot Measure 2 affect the feasibility of the tax base measure, Ballot Measure 51? 'rhe answer is no, if Ballot Measure 2 does not pass; and, it is yes, if Ballot Measure 2 does pass. DISCUSSION We were fully aware of the constitutional provision which made initiative measures effective 30 days after passage . In fact, these provisions were cited to your staff with regard to the sale of Dartmouth bonds. Nevertheless, in the minds of those involved in the preparation of the Attorney General ' s opinion, the issue was not settled. Since the issue was unsettled, the ballot measure was prepared. From the inception of this endeavor, we have made it clear that we must meet the requirements of both current law and Ballot Measure 2 . This means we must meet both the language requirements and the vote requirements. With regard to the vote requirement of 50% of the registered voters, it is preferable to go this November since it is a presidential election year. You asked us to prepare four ballot reasures: (1) a tax base ' measure; (2) a serial levy; (3) a measure involving the sale of Dartmouth bonds; and (4) a measure in,rolving a blanket approval of LID' s. Early in the proc-ss, we encountered a problem with the serial levy approach. The problem was that Ballot Measure 2 requires that any money measure state the amount of revenue the measure ' s intended to produce . At that time, the City was unsure exactly how the formula affected the City. Anyway, for a number of reasons the City decided to go with a new tax base measure. Given the level of knowledge at the time, the State Legislative Revenue office assisted us in the preparation of a ballot measure. At that time, it was their opinion that it would work. We also worked with the State Department of Revenue. The Attorney General has now published an opinion regarding Ballot Measure 2 . The opinion holds that the effective date is December 6, 1984 . It is also the opinion of both Mr. Jim Schursinger at aSa�+ _el Legislative Revenue and Mr. Ira Jones at the Attorney General ' s CO3A 1 office that no tax base or serial levy measure can be acted upon at the November election because of the December 6, 1984 effective date. The argument is that you cannot vote and override something on a November 6th election which is not in effect until December 6th. AB:mch 9/18/84 Page 1 O'DONNELL. DATE September 18 , 1984 SULLIVAN Q RAMIS ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO Robert Jean, Tigard City Administrator 1727 N W HOYT STREET PORTLAND OREGON 97209 15031222-4402 FROM Adrianne Brockman RE November Tax Base Election Further, the argument is that it has a two-part effective date. The election aspect is effective December 61 1984 ; ail the actual tax base or tax rate aspect is effective July 1, 1982P. The tax base measure, No. 51, however, is effective December 6, 1984 . The Oregon Constitution does allow home rule cities to enact ordinances regarding initiative and referendum procedures. The possibility of enacting an ordinance which has effective dates for Measure 51 which circumvent Measure 2 was discussed with the Attorney General ' s office. It was agreed that it is a possibility, but it is really in the dark gray area and extensive research will be required to determine the feasibility. Further, the December 6th effective date still presents a problem. The Attorney General ' s office simply does not know what the courts would do if: 1. Measure 51 passes with a majority of the registered voters voting; and 2 . The City adopted an ordinance under its home rule powers to circumvent the effective dates. f The Attorney General ' s office states that if the courts apply the - intent of Ballot Measure 2 , the City' s efforts will fail . On the other hand, they found the California courts fashioned strange opinions to help jurisdictions. This may or may not be the case in Oregon. The problem the City must understand is that this is a totally unchartered area . We are operating in the very dark gray area and have no idea of what the outcome will be. Further, the next opportunity to go to the voters will be in May. This means the City will want the outcome of the November election decided by the courts by the filing date for the May election. Assuming both Measure 2 and Measure 51 pass, the City will need to immediately prepare its budget, have the tax levy certified and have the assessor refuse to levy it. This is a good way to get the measure to court. This matter will be decided by a judge and Mr. Jones states that it will go to the Tax Court. I have not researched this, however. As you can see, the City is treading on unchartered territory and the law is very dark gray. AB:mch 9/18/84 Page 2 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY �► AGENDA OF: Sept.24, ]984 AGENDA ITEM k: DATE SUBMITTED: Cept. 19, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Prohibiting _ Truck Traffic on Durham Rd. REQUESTED BY; City Council DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: ` �� CITY ADMINISTRATOR: INFORMATION SUMMARY See attached Memorandum ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED SUGGESTED ACTION t 3 To: city..AafaiTi strator 14, 1984 FROM: Ca-pt. Jennings S"I]CT: Prohibi ted Truck, 'ITO f f ic Oil Certain t> i It 1 t-(' Streets in Tigard Chi April 10, 1984 Lh,-, Wi-;hinciton Ca-tasty lk),Ird of Order 84-151. as an interim solution to truck traffic noi:;- on S.V Durhoi,i ,I'L j a I ,I4-iii Po,-id in 'I'Lialatin, and ly-kh w-.1 0 post�-zd: pc),Ad in Tigard, and S-W. '1'fROUGH TRUCKS 3 P.M. an(A Problem: 1) The Minute Ord(T iS vagus and ambiqiious. it. does, rot define Truck u gross weight IiinitaLicrs. wh it itthori -j s a driver INII t- court has jurisdictior- 2) The signs that were- p,)--;tr-,(I, asid(, From r)�ing vaque, are rx�orly located in positions that once a truck h;)-, cc)ir-jftj-ttec1 it-S.c-1-47 anal C-inr--)t turn around, it must cDnLinu,. and i ; i_n violation of t-h Order. Questions were directed to County Council AttornF2y Alzin 13c,iJiiiin, %-.,hich he addL:u---sc-d (see attached) . und-:i ORS 431.065 Lh- J:Ainition of ...Fruck Tract-.(:a" talk ; OF H1,1Xi-M-:7T1 10-14 0' 8,000 lo-'. or core. ORS A83.01,,l "M:-)ter Truck" defin,Dd, again ta.'ks of a gross x%eight in C;';Ce ;3 of 8,000 lbs. 1. 1-t is my opinion that a weight- limitation of 8,000 lbs- i-E, tc--� YE'St-CictiV,-- vehicles which are causing the prol I high^r G jjr(- those in -t]v 20,COO Los. and high 1 VW classes. `!'herefore, a 20,000 lbs. GVW lindtation woA-6, he ate for Durbl-Airk Road. In researching vilhat classification of offense this would b-�, I v7as advised by Tetter from Chi^f AL;sistant. Cowity Co,,ms;c-,l AlanS. Pach-,,,-m th-it a-i offers of this nature would be a (--Ii-,s A traffic infraction. I disl-iqrce. Under authority of ORS 487.905 the penalties sot out for violation of 4;ro!;S w-.-ighL orders are minimum fines and/or specified jail- Any traffic infraction penalty can only Ix, a fine. Any offense punil;hable by fine and/or is a crime. it is my opinion that a violation of the-� 14inuto C)i:(I(-r !f4-151. ca>ald be classified as an Unclassified Misder�clanor- 1, in part, agree that court of jurisdiction N.:ould i-)-- Court, but have b-x--,n advised Tigard Justice Court wool c7 jurif.--,iictR-)-1 for violation of the Minute order (ORS 153.565), as the pibli-1- rcx-id (Durham Road) is Linder County Counsel's jurisdiction, and enforccment would ther-,�Fore be cited into either court but that Tigard Police Dopaftrent w-)uld U:;��' Ti(jal:J Justice Court because of the convenience of its being here in the City. { I've arranged with ;dashincjton County Public Works Orerations Director Mike Sorreson through Rick Daniels to put a 20,000 lbs. GVW restriction addendum to the County Minute Order tt84-151. Mr. Borreson i"ndi.cates it will be submitted to County Council for consideration on their 9/25/84 regular meeting agendA. I've also arranged with DOT Division pcmidssion to the Co-Lnty to install the two restriction signs in proper r locations on StaLe f]ig;i:aay Right of V, . The only obstacle I can anticipate at this tines is if the County Council stalls on a decision to be acre specific in th1 CtilJ restriction, the installation of the signs will be delayed and enforcerrR:.nt prchgram heli up. Respectfully, R.B. ADAMS CHIEF OF FOLICP � ' BY: Cars. Kel ey D. 17enn.i ngs Acting C,}1i.ef of,,Qlice R3A:KDJ:ac (durham rd) 1I Pr/ r �- /G V Lf ✓ C Cc-cr r/ 7 r- oN --7 �<.%" WASHINGTON COUNTY r` W, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING— 150 N. FIRST AVENUE 'JUL 1 1 19 HILLSBORO, OREGON 97123 RE O� SIIIlI:';"1 &RINt,11S CDUNTY COUNSEL BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS R00.'.%401 WES MYLLENBECK, Chairman July 6, 1984 . 1`•03)643-6747 BONNIE L. HAYS, Vice Chairman EVA M. KILLPACK JOHN E. MEEK LUCILLE WARREN Adrianne J. Brockman Attorney at Law 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street "`' Portland, Oregon 97209 RE: Tigard Police Department Enforcement of County Board' s Limitation of Trucks on Durham Road Dear Ms. Brockman: You have asked our office the following questions : 1. When the police arrest a person, to what authority do they cite? A citation should indicate an alleged violation of ORS 487.905 as well as the Washington County Board's minute order. The number of the minute order has already been provided to the Tigard Police Chief. (Minute Order 84-151) 2. What is a truck? It is my understanding that the Board did not adopt any definition of a truck. A truck, therefore, should be as defined in the Oregon Motor Vehicle Code. 3. What type of offense did`-the Board intend this to be? In looking at this,the Board intended the minute order to be a violation of ORS 487.905. ORS 487.905 does not indicate what type of infraction a violation of this section is. There is no mention of what the fine or penalty is for violation of the prohibition of operating certain vehicles at certain times. ORS 153.620 says that an offense defined in the Oregon Motor Vehicle Code which is not classi- fied as a crime or traffic infraction or for which a penalty is not otherwise specifically provided shall be considered a Class A traffic infraction. It appears that this particular C offense fits within ORS 153.620 and is therefore a Class A traffic infraction. an equal opportunity emploi-er Adrianne J. Brockman July 6, 1984 Page two 4. What court has jurisdiction over the enforcement of this order? Since we are dealing with a road under the County' s jurisdiction, it would be appropriate to cite the alleged offenders into the County's District Court. If you have any other questions or need further clarification please so advise. Sincerely, Alan S. Bachman Chief Assistant County Counsel ASB:dee cc: Richard Daniels, Director, LUT P i C CITY OF i'IGARD, OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: City Administrator September 14, 1984 FROM: apt. Jennings SUBJECT: Prohibited Truck Traffic on Certain Designated Streets in Tigard On April 10, 1984 the Washington County Board of Commissioners passed a Minute Order 84-151 as an interim solution to truck traffic noise problems on S.W. Durham Road in Tigard, and S.W. Tualatin Road in Tualatin, and both were posted: "NO E THROUGH TRUCKS BETWEEN 3 P.M. and 9 A.M." Problem: 1) The Minute Order is vague and ambiguous. It does not define Truck or gross weight limitations. To what authority is a driver cited? What court has jurisdiction? 2) The signs that were posted, aside from being vague, are poorly located in positions that once a truck has committed itself and cannot turn around, it must continue and is in violation of the Order. Questions were directed to County Council Attorney Alan Bachman, which he addressed (see attached) . Under ORS 481.065 the definition of "Truck Tractor" talks of maximum load of 8,000 lbs. or more. ORS 483.014 "Motor Truck" defined, again talks of a gross weight in excess of 8,000 lbs. It is my opinion that a weight limitation of 8,000 lbs. is too restrictive. The vehicles which are causing the problems are those in the 20,000 lbs. and higher GVW classes. Therefore, a 20,000 lbs. GVW limitation would be appropriate for Durham Road. In researching what classification of offense this would be, I was advised by letter frau Chief Assistant County Counsel Alan S. Bachman that an offense of this nature would be a class A traffic infraction. I disagree. Under authority of ORS 487.905 the penalties set out for violation of gross weight orders are minimum fines and/or_ specified jail sentences. Any traffic infraction penalty can only be a fine. Any offense punishable by fine and/or imprisonment is a crime. It is my opinion that a violation of the Minute Order #84-151 would be classified as an Unclassified Misdemeanor. I, inpa rt, agree that court off jurisdiction would be Washington County District Court, but have been advised Tigard Justice Court would also have jurisdiction for violation of the Minute Order (ORS 153.565), as the public road (Durham Road) is under County Counsel's jurisdiction, and enforcement would therefore be cited into either court but that Tigard Police Department would use Tigard Justice Court because of the convenience of its being here in the City. { f I've arranged with Washington County Public Works Operations Director Mike Borreson through Rick Daniels to put a 20,000 lbs. GVW restriction addendum to the County Minute Order #84-151. Mr. Borreson indicates it will be submitted to County Council for consideration on their 9/25/84 regular meeting agenda. I've also arranged with DOT Highway Division permission to the County to install the two restriction signs in proper locations on State Highway Right of Way. The only obstacle I can anticipate at this time is if the County Council stalls on a decision to be more specific in the GVW restriction, the installation of the signs will be delayed and enforcement program held up. Respectfully, R.B. ADAMS CHIEF OF POLIO-,� BY: Capt. Ke ey D. ' ennings { Acting ief of Police RBA:KDJ:ac (durham rd) WASHINGTON COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING—150 N. FIRST AVENUE JUL 11 1984 HILLSBORO, OREGON 97123 COUNTY COUNSEL BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Ro o:A 401 • WES MYLLENBECK, Chairman July 6 , 1984 1503 6488747 BONNIE L. HAYS, Vice Chairman EVA M. KILLPACK JOHN E. MEEK LUCILLE WARREN Adrianne J. Brockman Attorney at Law 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 RE: Tigard Police Department Enforcement of County Board' s Limitation of Trucks on Durham Road Dear Ms. Brockman: You have asked our office the following questions : 1. When the police arrest a person, to what authority do they cite? A citation should indicate an alleged violation of ORS 487.905 as well as the Washington County Board' s minute order. The number of the minute order has already been provided to the Tigard Police Chief. (Minute Order 84-151) 2. What is a truck? It is my understanding that the Board did not adopt any definition of a truck. A truck, therefore, should be as defined in the Oregon Motor Vehicle Code. 3. What type of offense did the Board intend this to be? In looking at this, the Board intended the minute order to be a violation of ORS 487.905. ORS 487.905 does not indicate what type of infraction a violation of this section is. There is no mention of what the fine or penalty is for violation of the prohibition of operating certain vehicles at certain times. ORS 153.620 says that an offense defined in the Oregon Motor Vehicle Code which is not classi- fied as a crime or traffic infraction or for which a penalty is not otherwise specifically provided shall be considered a Class A traffic infraction. It appears that this particular offense fits within ORS 153.620 and is therefore a Class A traffic infraction. an equal opportunity employer Adrianne J. Brockman July 6, 1984 (� Page two 4. What court has jurisdiction over the enforcement of this order? Since we are dealing with a road under the County' s jurisdiction, it would be appropriate to cite the alleged offenders into the County's District Court. If you have any other questions or need further clarification please so advise . Sincerely, Alan S. Bachman Chief Assistant County Counsel ASB:dee cc: Richard Daniels, Director, LUT O'DONNELL. SULLIVAN & RAMIS eANSY oine5 ATTORNEYS AT LAW lel N GNANT,Suli[202 (ARK P.0 DONNELL CANBY,OREGON 97013 :)WARD J.SULLIVAN• BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING (5031 266.1149 (IMOTHY V.RAMIS 1727 N.W. Hoy?STRtaT -- KENNETH M.ELLIOTT PORTLAND.OREGON 97209 04L[r OFF Ca CORINNE C.SHERTON (503) 222.4402 Eoulrw[Lt C[NTaR Tow[w STEPHEN f.CREW 530 CaN rtK ST.N.[ BUTT[240 STEVEN L.PFEIFFER SALEM.OREGON 97301 KIRKLAND T.RODE FITS PLtwa[K[ILY 70 IOK7LAND O/,IG[ (503) 376-9191 •ADS TTID iN Ow.GON.NO 1M[ ADRIA NNE J BROCKMAN VOJUN Or COUNatLJune 12, 1984 I V:'84 COUNTY COUNSEL Mr. Alan Bachman Washington County Counsel ' s Office 150 N. First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 Dear Alan: In order for the Tigard Police Department to enforce the limitation of trucks on Durham Road, would you please provide us with answers to the following questions: (1) When the police arrest a person, to what authority do they cite? (2) What is a truck and to what authority do we cite? Please note the memorandum from Lucille Warren to the Board and the minutes of the meeting. The question is: what did the Board intend? (3) What type of offense did the Board intend this to be? There is no discussion of it in the minutes. I assume it is a Class C traffic infraction, but would appreciate confirmation of this. (4) What court has jurisdiction over the enforcement of this order? The police do not know whether to cite them into municipal court or district court. Thank you very much for considering this request. As you know, this has been a long-standing community issue. The city is anxious to enforce this order, but they cannot do it without answers to the above questions. SjB: ;W l , O , SULLIVAN & RAMIS Ae J. Brockman A WASHINGTON COUNTY elf.1 °J Iu Inter—Department Correspondence t[- 1 � DULL Apri 1 10, 1984 To Records Division From Donald D. Sti lwe i l R�f County Administrator Subject Minute Order 84-151 Posting Durham Road and Tualatin Road for "No Through Trucks Between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m." At the regular meeting of the Board of Comrnissioners on April 10, 1984, they voted 3-0 (Myllenbeck and Killpack absent) to adopt staff recommendation as an interim solution to truck traffic noise problems as follows: Post Durham Road and Tualatin Road for "No Through Trucks Between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m." /mc cc: Land Use b Transportation City of Tualatin, Attn. Steve Rhodes i I WASHINGTON COUNTY ` Iulcr—I)epnrIonrtrl ( rrri spilrrdcIf,4• pvrc April 4, 1984 To Board of Commissioners Commissioner Lucille Warren Subic L:I Durham Road Background: Last year, I brought to the Board of Commissioners a neighborhood suggestion to partially eliminate truck traffic on Durham Road to alleviate noise and traffic congestion. The original request of the Summerfield-Tigard Liaison Committee was for a complete ban on truck traffic on Durham Road, with a weight limit of 20,000 pounds. The alternative suggested last year was for no truck traffic over 30,000 pounds between the hours of 3 p.m. and 9 a.m. During recent meetings with the committee and with CP06. Tigard, there were two alternatives again offered: 1. A 20,000 pound weight limit on Durham Road 2. Closure to trucks over 20,000 pounds between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m. Reasons for further consideration are increased traffic flow on Pacific Highway by better timing on traffic lights. and an apparent misunderstanding by at least one Board member that the compromise brought to the Board of Commissioners last year had, in fact, not " been put into action. Either alternative would allow only local deliveries through the residential area during evening hours when nearby residents are attempting to enjoy their backyards and patios. The Board of Equalization last session reduced some property values on Durham Road partially because of the traffic noise and fumes. I would ask the Board to consider one of the alternatives as a temporary solution pending completion of transportation studies in the Southwest Corridor. The final solution would be to give jurisdiction of Durham Road to the City of Tigard after those studies have been completed and a transportation agreement signed between all jurisdictions. LW:mc cc: Don Stilwell Rick Daniels r 111 �a-- i WASHINGTON COUNTY cam,„:�. •----' ADMINISTRATION BUILDING—150 N. FIRST AVENUE ai HILLSBORO, OREGON 87111 G IM1I MNNI ' OARO Of COMMISSIONERS May 25, 1983 tV �,d Andy Cotugno Metro 527 S.W. Hall Portland, Oregon 97201 Dear Andy: Attaches is a minute order-approved copy of a memo from Larry Rice addressing the need to expand the 99W South Corridor Study to obtain additional information on trucks, where they come from, where they are going to, and what routes they use. Many joint city/county. NOT decisions await this informa- tion. If you cannot expand your study, please let us know so. we can make other arrangements. Since ly yours. Wes Myllenbeck Chairman Board of Commissioners WM:LR:ja:1:2 Attachment cc: Ed Hardt, ODOT Cities of Tigard. B!3rton. Durham. Tualatin. and Sherwood Larry Rice C Agenda itcin No REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION D -5--- • h ancy/Department Public Works Agency/Department Head Larry Rice be( asented by_ Larry Rice Telephone 406 Agenda Title- Durham Road Truck Study Recommendation of Dept Head X Public Hearing *Other spat y Estimated Cost $-0 Contract Approved by Review Committee Amount Approved In Budget Yes__ ommendattonl (See the five recommended actions on the attached memo.) tate,d Prior Resolution or Minute Order Number ncy/Departments Brief Description of Action Desired and Justification (Attach Supporting Documents/Justification If Necessary) (See attached memo) LR:ja:1:2 Attachment 0009 �e: May 9. 1983 Signature iencx epartment Head events: APPR:)V'ZU:.i.-`•l:ING70M COUNTi • finance: 8O;:CD Cr C0%j.%,j5S10NERS K11JUTE ORDER s ........Lt•.�•»-•s • DAT _.�.�• ... County Administrator: cY cus TH WASHINGTON COUNTY Infer—Depot I metal Correspondence Date May 9. 1983 To : Honorable Board of County Commissioners From t Larry Rice, Director of Public Works ,lei Subject I Durham Road Truck Study As directed by your Board, an interested-party meeting was held on Monday. May 9, 1983. to discuss options. Present were representatives from the trucking industry, the titles of Tigard, Durham. Sherwood, andT alatin. and Washington County. The County proposed to impose a weight and time limit on Durham Road. This was discussed and rejected by the majority of those present due to a lack of data addressing impact and benefit of the action. Two policies are at question: 1. Shall through trucks be prohibited from using city or county east/west roads as connectors between State or Interstate highways? ' 2. Shall operations hours for the trucking industry located in the area be established? For example: 6 AM to 9 PM, Monday through Saturday, closed on Sunday. Given these policy proposals. the cost impact to the trucking industry needs to be determined and impacts on other roads need to be determined. The group recommended (Tigard abstaining) the cities and the County request Metro and ODOT address these policies in their 99W Study scheduled for this next fiscal year. A special Origin and Destination Study would need to be done for trucks. ODOT would be requested to do it. It is recommended Your Board, by minute order, take the following action: 1. Agree to join with cities of Tualatin, Sherwood, Durham, and, hopefully, Tigard, in developing a comprehensive multi-agency solution to the trucking problems in the I-5, Highway 217, 99W area; 2. Request Metro and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) expand the 99W South Corridor Study to include truck origin and destination data in the area of Sherwood. Highway 217, 99W and I-5, and distribute such data upon ,the internal road system as best possible; 3. Request this portion of the study be completed early; APPROVED WASHINGTON COUNT% BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS b4INUTE ORDER/ «.»•R ...:•'�•6 ...-- 4. Using study results. agree to join with industry. the cities, and the State in developing a strategy for the area; S. Authorise the chairman to so notify Metro and NOT. Respectfully submitted. Larry Rice r LR:Ja:2:2 cc: Earl Reed. Traffic Engineer (Washington County) City of Durham City of Sherwood City of Tigard ' City of Tualatin Page 2 Board of Commissioners Durham Road Truck Study APPROVED V:ASIIINGTON COUNTY May 9. 1983 SOAHD CF COMMISSIONERS . MINUTE ORDER i DA ••.r• nr-.r• a JIARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY Page 5 1984 !. LAND USE b TRANSPORTATION Revisions to Local Improvement District Administrative See additional action Policies n this item on pages 7 and 8) Tabled until after afternoon worksession. Motion--Warren Second--Meek Vote 3-0 6a. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Durham Road Warren reviewed her memo to the Board regarding the truck traffic noise and vibration problem on Durham Road. If truck traffic is banned on Durham Road, she requested traffic counters on Tualatin and Edy Roads to document the impact on them, with a report back to the Board on this study. If there is negative impact, this issue would be revisited by the Board. Daniels proposed as alternative to trucks going through to 15 that, along with monitoring, no through trucks be allowed between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m. on a 7-day week basis. Steve Rhodes, City of Tualatin, said he understood information from the May 1983 study is now available. If the road is closed down, they will receive many complaints and asked that "no through trucks" be placed on Tualatin Road as well . Warren said these actions will possibly motivate people to work with the county to establish the belt line road that would alleviate this problem. Rhodes agreed that Nyberg Road/Edy Road would be a suitable interim truck route. They can work with the county to monitor traffic on these routes. Philip Fell of Metropolitan Service District stated their only interest today was that Board retain the flexibility to negotiate an overall solution to the problem when the Southwest Corridor study is completed, which they expect to be within this calendar year. Eunice Day, 15940 SW Oak Meadow Lane (Summerfield) as f Chairman of committee within Summerfield dealing with both county and city government affairs, stated that unmuffled trucks and those pulling loads cause dis- ruption of the lives of homeowners in the area. Dave Atkinson, 10460 SW Sentry Oak Drive, President of Summerfield Civic Association, stated vibrations from truck traffic have intensified over past year and reiterated need for relief of problems. Bob Haas, Tualatin City Councilman, supported the proposed ban on Tualatin Road and also on Durham Road. It is an areawide problem and asked Board not to take permanent actions until all jurisdictions can participate and agree to a solution. I !!INtITES--BOARD OF- COMIISSIONERS, FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY Page APRIL 10, 1984 6a. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Daniels suggested Board establish an interim solution (" (Continued) pending completion of Southwest Corridor study that SW Durham Road and Tualatin Road be labeled "No .Through - Trucks- Between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m." and that traffic monitoring be established on Pacific Hiahway and on Edy Road to identify any problems tha? sight occur on those roads. Moved to adopt staff recommendation as an interim solution to post "No_ThrougbTrucks_Between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m." on Durham Road and Tualatin Road MO 84-151 Motion=--Warren Second=-Meek - - Vote 3-0 7a. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS Appointments to Juvenile Services Commission was held AND COMMISSIONS over for action on 4-24-84. Motion--Warren Second--Meek Vote 3-0 7b. Appointed Richard Berklund and Lou Matthes to Mental Health Advisory Committee. MO 84-152 Motion--Warren Second--Meek Vote 3-0 OFF-DOCKET Authorized Chairman of the Board to write to State Representative Delna Jones requesting that she obtain an official Attorney General 's opinion on issue of the county's responsibility to place the Aloha incorporation issue on the ballot. MO 84-153 Motion--Warren Second=-Meek Vote 3-0 i The foregoing action was taken as a response to a request from attorney Henry Kane and upon the advice of County Counsel that the opinion was necess_:ry before any decision is made to place the Aloha issue on the ballot. 8. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None presented 9. BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS Meek reminded Board of invitations received from Port of Portland hosting a Business After Hours meeting at Hillsboro Airport. Meek commented that response was good to Rainy Day Tours of—Hillsboro last Saturday. Warren stated Myllenbeck discussed tax base at Royal Mobile Villa last Friday. She was also present to represent the county. HaZs commented that Meek provided evaluation policies boo let for evaluating the County Administrator. Warren announced that it is not the policy of the Board to have an Animal Control that does not have a spay and neuter program. Stilwell is studying this now and will bring back a recommendation to the Board. BOARD RECESSED 11 :53 a.m. to reconvene into worksession at 2 p.m. BOARD RECONVENED 3:50 p.m.. with Chairman Myllenbeck conducting the meeting and resuming with consideration of item 5a. I MFMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: City Administrator FROM: Capt. Jennings SUBJECT: Prohibited Truc4- Traf`'ic on Certain Designated Streets in Tigard On April 10, 1-084 the Washington County Board of Commissioners passed a Minute Order 84-151 as an interim solution to truck traffic noise problem on S.W. Durham Road in Tigard and S.W. Tualatin Road in Tualatin, and both were posted: "^10 THROUGH TRUCKS BETWFFN 3 PM AND 9 AM." Problem: 1) The Minute Order is vague and ambiguous. It does not define Truck or gross weight limitations. To what authority is a driver cited? What court has jurisdiction? 2) Th( aigns that were posted, aside from being vague, are poorly located in positions that once a truck has committed itself and cannot turn around, it must continue and is in violation of the order. Questions were directed to County Council Attorney Alan Bachman, which he addressed (see attached) . Under ORS 481.065 the definition of "Truck "Tactor" talks of maximum load of 8,000 lbs. or more. ORS 483.014 "Motor Truck" defined, again talks of a gross weight in excess of 8,000 lbs. In the past it has been discussed of setting a weight restriction of 20,000 to perhaps as much as 30,000 lbs. G.V-W. I submit that an empty "dump truck" licensed for 45-50,000 G.V-V!. weighs aoproximatelif 18,000 lbs. , and even unloaded creates the same noise problem that is the concern of local residents. Proposal : Under authority of O.R.S. 487.905 it is my interpretation that ,jointly ,,the governing body of a county and the city council, with respect to highways or streets under their respective jurisdiction. . . .imoose limits as to any gross weif,hts. . . .that in their iudgement are necessary. . . .to protect the interest and safety of the general public." This statute gives the authority to the Board of Commissioners and Tigard City Council to act, and it would be my recommendation that proper regulatory signs be placed in appropriate locations prohibiting through truck traffic in excess of 10,000 lbs. G.V.W. on those highways and streets determined not appropriate to such traffic using those routes as a short cut connector from Interstate Highway 5 to U.S. Highway 99W, or in reverse. Respectfully, Capt el e D. Jennings Ope tion Commander KDJ:ac WASHINGTON COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING— 150 N. FIRST AVENUE JUL 11 1984 HILLSBORO, OREGON 97123 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS COUNTY COUNSEL WES MYLLENBECK, Chairman July 6 1984 goon,4 01/ - 15031648-- 8747 BONNIE L. HAUS, Vice Chairman EVA M. KILLPACK JOHN E. MEEK LUCILLE WARREN Adrianne J. Brockman Attorney at Law 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 RE: Tigard Police Department Enforcement of County Board's Limitation of Trucks on Durham Road Dear Ms. Brockman: You have asked our office the following questions : 1. When the police arrest a person, to what authority do they cite? A citation should indicate an alleged violation of ORS 487.905 as well as the T-, tshington County board's minute order. The number of the minute order has already been provided to the Tigard Police Chief. (Minute Order 84-151) 2. What is a truck? It is my understanding that the Board did not adopt any definition of a truck. A truck, therefore, should be as defined in the Oregon Motor Vehicle Code. 3. What type of offense did the Board intend this to be? In looking at this, the Board intended the minute order to be a violation of ORS 487.905. ORS 487.905 does not indicate what type of infraction a violation of this section is. There is no mention of what the fine or penalty is for violation of the prohibition of operating certain vehicles at certain times. ORS 153.620 says that an offense defined in the Oregon Motor Vehicle Code which is not classi- fied as a crime or traffic infraction or for which a penalty is not otherwise specifically provided shall be considered a Class A traffic infraction. It appears that this particular offense fits within ORS 153.620 and is therefore a Class A traffic infraction. an equal opportunity employer Adrianne J. Brockman July 6, 1984 Page two 4. What court has jurisdiction over the enforcement of this order? Since we are dealing with a road under the County's jurisdiction, it would be appropriate to cite the alleged offenders into the County's District Court. If you have any other questions or need further clarification please so advise. Sincerely, Alan S. Bachman Chief Assistant County Counsel ASB:dee cc: Richard Daniels, Director, LUT C O'DONNELL, BULLIVAN & RAMIS •RK P O DONNELL ATTORNEYS AT LAW 151 N GRANT F&Fula[202 'WARD J.SULLIVAN• BALLOW Q WRIGHT BUILDING CANDY,OREGON 57013 TIMOTHY V.RAMIS 1727 NW HorT erw[[T 15031 255.1145 N.KENNETH M.ELLIOTT - CORINNE C SHCRTON PORTLAND.OREGON 57205 SALEM OFIlea STEPHEN F CREW 15031 222-4402 EouIT41111_t CENTER TowEn STEVEN L PFEIFFER 530 CENTER 5T.N.E.SUIT[240 KORKLAND T.ROBERTS PLt AS[R[/LT TO PORTLAND o►FIC[ SALEM.OREGON 57301 15031 378-5151 ADRIANNE J BROCKMAN •Ao. Trco H o........... O,CONN[[L V19��I� D June 12, 1984 JUN 4 ,:GLI COUNTY COUNSEL Mr. Alan Bachman Washington County Counsel ' s Office 150 N. First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 Dear Alan: In order for the Tigard Police Department to enforce the limitation of trucks on Durham Road, would you please provide us with answers to the following questions: (1) When the police arrest a person, to what authority do they cite? (2) What is a truck and to what authority do we cite? Please note the memorandum from Lucille Warren to the Board and the minutes of the meeting. The question is: what did the Board intend? (3) What type of offense did the Board intend this to be? There is no discussion of it in the minutes. I assume it is a Class C traffic infraction, but would appreciate confirmation of this. (4) What court has jurisdiction over the enforcement of this order? The police do not know whether to cite them into municipal court or district court. Thank you very much for considering this request. As you know, this has been a long-standing community issue. The city is anxious to enforce this order, but they cannot do it without answers to the above questions . Sincerel , O'DON , SULLIVAN & RAMIS �,fiGl,Q!!�/ A anne J. Brockman A B:sw 1'Cel,I Cid 1 WASHWASHINGTON COUNTY c"I " 11A``'� Inter—ptparimtnJ Corrtspondcnct 0 Datc Apri 1 10, 1984 To Records Division Frmn Donald D. StilwellR County Administrator sobj."l Minute Order 84-151 Posting Durham Road and Tualatin Road for "No Through Trucks Between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m." At the regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners on April 10, 1984, they voted 3-0 (Myllenbeck and Killpack absent) to adopt staff recommendation as an interim solution to truck traffic noise problems as follows: t Post Durham Road and Tualatin Road for "No Through Trucks Between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m." s /mc cc: Land Use b Transportation City of Tualatin, Attn. Steve Rhodes i i t s t F F t a d i i i {4 i M F i _f F WASHINGTON COUNTY hilcr-1):purUn:n1 ( rri•pud:n:r Duty April 4. 1984 To Board of Commissioners Frum Commissioner Lucille Warren Subjrcr 7 Durham Road Background: Last year. I brought to the Board of Commissioners a neighborhood suggestion to partially eliminate truck traffic on Durham Road to alleviate noise and traffic congestion. The original request of the Summerfield-Tigard Liaison Committee was for a complete ban on truck traffic on Durham Road, with a weight limit of 20.000 pounds. The alternative suggested last year was for no truck traffic over 30,000 pounds between the hours of 3 p.m. and 9 a.m. During recent meetings with the committee and with CP06, Tigard, there were two alternatives again offered: 1. A 20.000 pound weight limit on Durham Road i 2. Closure to trucks over 20.000 pounds between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m. Reasons for further consideration are increased traffic flow on Pacific Highway by better timing on traffic lights, and an apparent misunderstanding by at least one Board member that the compromise brought to the Board of Commissioners last year had, in fact, not " been put into action. Either alternative would allow only local deliveries through the residential area during evening hours when nearby residents are attempting to enjoy their backyards and patios. The Board of Equalization last session reduced some property values on Durham Road partially because of the traffic noise and fumes. I would ask the Board to consider one of the alternatives as a temporary solution pending completion of transportation studies in the Southwest Corridor. The final solution would be to give jurisdiction of Durham Road to the City of Tigard after those studies have been completed and a transportation agreement signed between all jurisdictions. LW:mc cc: Don Stilwell Rick Daniels in �a- n.Kv 9Y 311333 WASHINGTON COUNTY ACMINISTPATION BUILDING—150 N. FIRST AVENUE HILLSBORO. OREGON 97113fleas 646-b"I r. Ct:spr. . �OAROOF COMMISSIONERS _nm;�-•� May 25, 1983 IVA t V Ardy Cotugno Oe:ro 527 S.W. Hall Portland, Oregon 97201 Dear Andy: Attached is a minute order-approved copy of a memo from Larry Rice addressing the need to expand the 99W South Corridor Study to obtain additional information on trucks, where they come from, where they are going to, and what routes they use. Many joint city/county, NOT decisions await this informa- tion. If you cannot expand your study, please let us know so. we can make other arrangements. Since4aly yours, Wes Mtyllenbeck Chairman Board of Connissioners WM:LR:j a:1:2 • Attachment cc: Ed Hardt, ODOT Cities of Tigard, Beton, Durham, Tualatin, and Sherwood Larry Rice C s✓ Agenda Iii-in No REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION ancy/Department Public Works Agency/Department Head_ Larry Rice be( -asented by Larry Rice Telephone_ 406 Agenda Title Durham Road Truck Study Recommendation of Dept Head X Public Hearing *Other • (spat I f y Estimated Cost Contract Approved by Review Committee Amount Approved In Budget Yes No N/A ommendationt jSee the five recommended actions on the attached memo.) fated Prior Resolution or Minute Order Number ,ncy/Dapartmentt Brief Description of Action Desired and Justification (Attach Supporting Documents/Justification If Necessary) (See attached memo) LR:3a:1:2 Attachment te: May 9, 1983 Signature gencyepartment Head nnen t s: APPRJ�:'D:.AFEING70H COUNTY • finance: aciAi►D OF COMMISSIONERS ( N.11JUTE 0F..WX 11 ........ DAT County Administrator CUR TI: WASHINGTON COUNTY Initr—Depart wcnl Corrtspoudcntt Date May 9, 1983 To : Honorable Board of County Commissioners From t Larry Rice,* Director of Public Works subject t Durham Road Truck Study As directed by your Board, an interested-party meeting was held on Monday. May 9, 1983, to discuss options. Present were representatives from,.the trucking industry, the cities of Tigard, Durham. Sherwood, anTualatin, an4 Washington County. The County proposed to impose a weight and time limit on Durham Road. This was discussed and rejected by the majority of those present due to a lack of data addressing impact and benefit of the action. Two policies are at question: 1. ' Shall through trucks be prohibited from using city or cotAity east/west roads as connectors between State or Interstate highways? 2. Shall operations hours for the trucking industry located in the area be established? For example: 6 AM to 9 PM, Monday through Saturday. closed on Sunday. Given these policy proposals. the cost impact to the trucking industry needs to be determined and impacts on other roads need to be determined. The group recommended (Tigard abstaining) the cities and the County request Metro and ODOT address these policies in their 99W Study scheduled for this next fiscal year. A special Origin and Destination Study would need to be done for trucks. ODOT would be requested to do it. It is recommended Your Board, by minute order, take the following action: 1. Agree to Join with cities of Tualatin, Sherwood, Durham, and, hopefully. Tigard, in developing a comprehensive multi-agency solution to the trucking problems in the 1-5. Highway 217, 99W area; 2. Request Metro and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) expand the 99W South Corridor Study to include truck origin and destination data in the area of Sherwood, Highway 217, 99W and 1-5, and distribute such data upon .the internal road system as best possible; 3. Request this portion of the study be completed early; APPROVED WASHINGTON COUNT% BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WINUTE ORDER/ 4. Using study results. agree to loin with industry. the cities. and the State in developing a strategy for the area; 5. /Authorize the chairman to so notify Metro and NOT. Respectfully submitted. Larry Rice LR:ja:2:2 cc: Earl Reed. Traffic Engineer (Washington County) City of Durham City of Sherwood City of Tigard City of Tualatin i Page 2 Board of Commissioners Durham Road Truck Study APPROVED V.ASIIINGTON COUNTY May 9, 1983 BOARD CF COMMISSIONS/RS MINUTE ORDER 0 ARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY Page 5 1984 LAND USE b TRANSPORTATION Revisions to Local Improvement District Administrative (See additional action Policies on this item on pages 7 Tabled until after afternoon worksession. and 8) Motion--Warren Second--Meek Vote 3-0 6a. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Durham Road Warren reviewed her memo to the Board regarding the truck traffic noise and vibration problem on Durham Road. If truck traffic is banned on Durham Road, she requested traffic counters on Tualatin and Edy Roads to document the impact on them, with a report back to the Board on this study. If there is negative impact, this issue would be revisited by the Board. Daniels proposed as alternative to trucks going through to I5 that, along with monitoring, no through trucks be allowed between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m. on a 7-day week basis. Steve Rhodes, City of Tualatin, said he understood information from the May 1983 study is now available. If the road is closed down, they will receive many complaints and asked that "no through trucks" be placed on Tualatin Road as well . Warren said these actions will possibly motivate people to work with the county to establish the belt line road that would dalleviate Road this problem. Rhodes agreed that Nyberg y would be a suitable interim truck route. They can work with the county to monitor traffic on these routes. f Philip Fell of Metropolitan Service District stated their only interest today was that Board retain the flexibility to negotiate an overall solution to the problem when the Southwest Corridor study is completed, which they expect i to be within this calendar year. Eunice Day, 15940 SW Oak Meadow Lane (Summerfield) as Chairman of committe3 within Summerfield dealing with both county and city government affairs, stated that unmuffled trucks and those pulling loads cause dis- ruption of the lives of homeowners in the area. I Dave Atkinson, 10460 SW Sentry Oak Drive, President of Summerfield Civic Association, stated vibrations from truck traffic have intensified over past year and reiterated need for relief of problems. Bob Haas, Tualatin City Councilman, supported the proposed ban on Tualatin Road and also on Durham Road. It is an areawide problem and asked Board not to take permanent actions until all jurisdictions can participate and agree to a solution. I 14INUTES--BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY Page APRIL 10, 1984 6a. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Daniels suggested Board establish an interim solution (Continued) pending completion of Southwest Corridor study that SW Durham Road and Tualatin Road be labeled "No .Through Trucks Between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m." and that traffic monitoring be established on Pacific Highway and on Edy Road to identify any problems that might occur on those roads. Moved to adopt staff recommendation as an interim solution to post _%o_Througb_Trucks__Between _p.m. and 9 a.m." on-Durham Road and Tualatin Road. MO 84-151 Motion= :Warren Second--Meek -- Vote 3-0 7a. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS Appointments to Juvenile Services Commission was held AND COMMISSIONS over for action on 4-24-84. Motion--Warren Second--Meek Vote 3-0 7b. Appointed Richard Berklund and Lou Hatthes to Mental Health Advisory Committee. MO 84-152 Motion--Warren Second--Meek Vote 3-0 OFF-DOCKET Authorized Chairman of the Board to write to State Representative Delna Jones requesting that she obtain an official Attorney General 's opinion on issue of the county's responsibility to place the Aloha incorporation issue on the ballot. MO 84-153 Motion--Warren Second--Meek Vote 3-0 The foregoing action was taken as a response to a request from attorney Henry Kane and upon the advice of County Counsel that the opinion was necessary before any decision is made to place the Aloha issue on the ballot. 8. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None presented 9. BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS Meek reminded Board of invitations received from Port of Portland hosting a Business After Hours meeting at Hillsboro Airport. Meek commented that response was good to Rainy Day Tours of—Hillsboro last Saturday. Warren stated Myllenbeck discussed tax base at Royal Mobile Villa last Friday. She was also present to represent the county. Haas commented that Meek provided evaluation. policies booklet for evaluating the County Administrator. Warren announced that it is not the policy of the Board to have an Animal Control that does not have a spay and i neuter program. Stilwell is studying this now and will bring back a recommendation to the Board. BOARD RECESSED 11 :53 a.m. to reconvene into worksession at 2 P.M. BOARD RECONVENED 3:50 p.m.- with Chairman Myllenbeck conducting the meeting and resuming with consideration of item 5a. 50-0 > m-o > p ■ m m m� o�v °m «'c c~d~ a c > c" o �'C $E e 6 Ps E e O c ° > o fib" .QQw,.' r9 •dY65E c-GE$..•m=�.8�. aE�Tcm' Cdcm.c'>•.0.LC7�6E' �°ucv'«m c4E«�CU wG �a.T�+ Ga�"?dn;'smm.�°$.9'C m= Y C aa.of o'Td cE cnucm m=o a�um�naa����Y,uO�� Mo mT.U'O wum'$-oOY'i.. S--■�•'ow°Oec mC° oOdu �s�csy4E Z. t 9 u . CO ° rzOo od d-gado EE'FaO:Os,flTE�o❑'co$='G28r c «Y ° a ° w«0ca,oEp�° s0 = E 3 rvr ra3 mc'd 2o> � Y o3 � .m, Cc.•-�W °1 ■ -C>a. �Y=o.$d 3�d° -�...�. mo0.ro FM>T,.�0.m d�yyOm.Gm S«d "mo oum:a3°E°'-c-G^' C0.a LaC.�mC y�$a,�•y G3mm�m i y=c Ex oti Es4S m. dd•°ameO wmVCo. o:>C,+-$�F'pFio'8Vo�rC�o•mp mdLdJY Eo�'.e«m5>m.5C u0C o.N+x.�0gqC�v>,'w�a FZa',$ 5ar �g $ Y °E0.Alto o o $-° �5 .Tma m .. u ° > > « C S CO t 4,,."o o. '� ._ c 5 6 0 - - 6 UTO O Y7p C Y3�•m:u->�y9 ss6am3'.co^MoL. e5.33c Yj C .q ■ e� av '� d< m o sm •i g. OTC F 'b Q«< o... 0 doG■ aoF. ■^�yq -' =g-c O0., H z v$ Vi m-.°^. ago i0 ^'4 N E " u m 3 d 3 d =a� ai �i t d C C > O ■1 Q.C" o C = o v a t p 7 u e u � 7 �� �;� �L d C O 'O >,U F•� 5 u w O Y w O �t.g V O.9 � y C C Y d ....C G aro b ,, ° P.' >m N y C .C.. G Y" y $ ma 42 6and ' «Eti7o ty.„..�='h.cY�o 3�Eo s'Oc 7as u■rC 8wd.o mCC«YS��Cg'ybd_dc8 aYsd■G«m^mm�ou o Z sm�•>��orE RrneMGQr�yEw^ u5Ts Yab ro TN,YQ;'O_- . oaJ3 ` C 0wd= °bCN C° ■ so a 'O C =L„ a °m; E ca«r d« > s c o $ pow � r. c « 3o` c Y, - « c 0 3 "8c n to Y o0 0 C0cno6.0cE�cmaE- T a mam. C0 > p YCOo,° C cmQ■$V > Ym' YNEi n Y+ TE a �'e=. V O i' G... C m 'mac >. �.� 4 .m.-9 ` g ° ^« ou YE � a Ya3E0.2 wyF $io 3 _ a o m a, 4 E �. o o o ore s-- .Y c -mm.� °'o o =j m« �' o v� C w.•9p C4. aC� T sa 7iCAd� d'.�+ O6i � YdW CO,.4 > mmb-i.. Y � Os dm O� o>, ■y'Q s, E 3 o $.t a3d YcE•.w E�� .. < �nqT$� 7+y So.G U m a 7 w C C `�' >•- u •p d O D G U ��^ Q `.� A T L' a C m C :. ay « $ p C]3Syx � Y drauoce v8. > Eeo « _� °�, m � 3$ ? o'osd v� 5'3 $,� W 'A9 YC"> �>."�3 8 d E« c6« 3:1 mm � E ` aF - > d o aY= o N >b� u oe= � � E � �': ��� o3« C w. �! Y Y '.X •o a or .'a.dvG •"�. <EoE� o� E ��1 ° Sn' �ac$ Jo-■Og v'r9�0, sm, i.�Qe•i �'' aJ} ao. � " ;', v' o5�$ � i'cY.`ouEB �ed, o'ave `d �d �' p�'mo'.3r' 00 Snv ° vo � '= «. •Z -;qA Eco a> �< .:$� r'o °� �u �F °-°mm E4� ocmE� S� o .3s ,1 $ mo T.0 T m d a-o 7 .+ d -:•5C taCm ■ >s' ? EwF 8" lc Y. 3y� o - �,w ?,nAa4n ydEo.oa +� ., O ° $ Tm.° �` TeO aa . E S .9 w .9 $-c u aYS bA � a m7 ✓ ami o s °� u oc ■s do ciq �Q3 o $ lo « 4 Y >,,a� woc �, cEE omGmoo ^� �E oy4oSosr �m« ro app or � 3 v 4 'S V. m�. mc �° � �a'„ ao ° « o � � d du'•-'.� •Y C 5 C ■ 5 p .S = U T Y N M $ >.9 = Y >. Gg,^ Ca G. 0 XJ YO m9 C. Cg S E 1, o uti < -0 UPC t o n� o °u m° e«� a n^~ 4 c = m.>" Es« > �o" ■osYu 'S- A■ W dgaO CU rG� 7b a9 $�oQ mg > C � OCL COU �SQ 0.5C "'re �dC°'C. � i DC i ' LLL o 6o= _o5eo E �yyso Q •fY gc >d y 6' •e m o c °� aF+ `c C > G o is $> E Fi g,•e•3 0 y L ems�.4 > ccdco y 8E _ o ■ 2Lo ■ 07!'.3a > a ,r -o �'.a_w . o3a ooA� 8r N ... •O .O ■ T DC T T E 4,-o v ■s ;, -.. �' $ > it e u o _ ■ •>, c till 163 r� 9 ° a ° .oar E s'.� ; r o m 9 A F_.� o• T•� w F ^. i B i c ■ 2 A'o C Q 1,6 a � .4sEL,! 0 d _ `oy o oy E K o �O� T`y �y y� L9 C Q C C Q C @ j R 3 � � �.rS a D � .T+ >,.y `.S a Obi.q�.�3 'G� '�'_'�^ tl 0 �S 8� d.O Y�ey � C �+ _a A i�:d m' ■ + a C r a r..7 C 3 ■ ■ O �•• O a .0 r O C O Y a o a 8 a Y r €o$ fa a. °8 _. a 8 �.5 Ye7 > o.S Y `�"°33�Ys � >. � "� u.ic= gm+ r £ c•�•�d p �oc� o..�._ c = Y5 � m t u = S p00,t oev «■ T�ps�; � 3 o�e�y+ ycrr� =O �flm oc _ $ 9a'� as qq � ; a� L y�� 8C.S a.Y oG. `J So wss �t.5�"' "_m'EBmo� �2EQQ Y.a .5 ��0 SQ R-A S ae a ■,I -= ns y5 4385y%fl8G� oAE g� BqooY aY ,�y �aei $ q� $ow� yq c a� $, .3y we c a ■ �n 3 ° `" >,' m it ■3s i ° m .. a.�„■ 9 jqe � c ' oid,mg � � G� rSUg c�oao, 5.-sew .egg B ooa: Oe � T s d... ce Y o a .0.'9 YL U A s � As7 � aymeG om Gc3 > aa�Eo od �r°oo"4seec °seao � $E8 > � aar �` .ig 58 ■ yygg ° � o _ = e gas M.Y.. d me Cy h Q.� .11 y .�. 0..9w .�rG.0.S m, Tv C.-. p.. O s.V T 0.�m .� o$ ,3$ o a aab <wgoa �'.G �3tioo� gumr-u < r s �2 a g ■ F r 8 mw 5 r 8•^ , u 1M P, d E o ° >° S 7 8 0.r r >.,tS m .`� .s d ■ "�~ 3o r 0.O p y 6 r o m o ° c o p 7 r a e o S Y c E fA o $ silo os, aE 0 cu ey Q. m Y� oyJ� ° e Y C >.0:4 > Q o °v �ow gg o s r+ r c n.°.P°�'� o >.m :v l�-• >-3 > pp m e •� m E -�Yi c - aD w R 0 `-'C.o e u 8 nc a0o 8 .tiw c c.C• cn �m `o � ap 5 � c T � ti � $���;c o4�".,� � p mb cro u >.°° mac ".flcSP' °.o-`• o .c D.m ax73Po d r� u fin `~� � v aoa T O d m Cv °�' �a....m� " ° 3w� uvaGE .� C ; m e �.G a c H -"•:: P.� i ° c Y.'^u, a 'O ° > `,o m a E u x•$� m m o m a u 4 ..0... E c r- -C c�_ �.° a " c •4 'ia �s c �i� a c. c ., f7 m E c o ° �.E_' m.E o ,� " E m w« ��+`.n. ° s C 'J. > 7 G Q: .O.° C•� .t m M v m w .1 m E V �.° oma ^ a.ec'� Go A`,sv. u_ a $ � a a c cmY;D �.n=,_'e• >,uEo..b �m... o ''1 � Gai+ cY Y'o� ° s �O �� >, �` m�Lc. ,`a•o3 c vE C vo,� �vom .+�'. 7 E T n �'L •`m .n O d e'b L �� 3 � %� �f� =� ��rc` �� c `.' %m a. � eya-•-o`.�^ �� mF79��w'fl� 41. CG •.o, Gc=� rV =^ �c vr � 5 Cm0 w�° �a mv = Yo CvCyYct w n�`'' - ^tt. ao - 'c•Y mEr--u0 v5 'od > E -� 3 _ V r ' a 3 °< c .«. c c1c � p cu ee m� i� wcn p �n3 °oo3yGcmap3E k: >' c ¢:_ � � .• m ri �' E u ='Ci C ai m c O u ro m o C U] .. C 3' «- O.r.f G •'G F m m '- m 0. C v v: 0 V > C� a L.E 1� .. � .- .i C u G � M .J u c s _ c E _. o v o.•- G i- O°c, s '°moo,�' c = m.""a Z�, _ aY. c ❑ - o-OO e'e.r Q �- C a �j2 � r •os ,-a,� " C..+N � 3 .�OA� rE �'��. C7� C� O °� ummw'oi73 fi u Y c L .°. �, u.u i u u 7J u°C.E 1 u a a °.�' .. 3 3 m.cv •�•_ �' �' w wm Q C ° � ° c m 4t9. E o a N 41 93 o " ❑ a o .�y a °•D a O �, - ^,Y.•O ` t7 O- •N 'D O Um °o La. w E e ° y �.c W p.m N7G >hciF7m �cGu r•0� 0a v- s- GO.0 CE u Gao u � u°: to ap > G til o a C m�• E a 3 m Y E C A -b w m 0 .j E... C � e O iccmccc ° u $ '+F�o3s � 0 - w ec Y v `c m a� m E o >. v o-e. a.e eo � Eiobu > s3 >Qs E3 >« 6O `LYoO �>°-.umam ou 3c a u o ? 4y3 `a .. �E��� c 3 m spm Wim'-''>o ua3 ",b � > i � ,a r'9T El-8 1 .E �` °~ �_^Y Y o y� o a Y E o E F C.rc z Cm uC 7Lu m Q L � >,u yy .°, 3 v °.3 a'i� p'�ouE CL O c K Y •O .Cj tr T ] OC u >:' m' .0 cdi s3 m b O.+ G. W - N d w m•� e C q n o'd 0 6L o o E•c .0 - a ° E w w c °° o a i v o F M ro ��•� E S E� ^, a .. � a.. o r Y o.` c mN 2 0 ao:;� �d� E,.� c 3 m°.3 � m/yca c4a°'3 �an y Cm`•.L+ >v p� .ua. v.s,�o °.1 3 u �'3 u0" m 3... L L+ A S O 5.3 a3 E ., my _ c; o .�,rr-� r-^ m .� u •o '>,` LY, C 't u �-`• �.E '� -a0..A E .. c,�.��.-.y oN< m y 0.2 2 m > .4 80 0.> a .0 t o a a ,^,ri • o r a,"•� G c o > 'o .Y. = G 'c. �_ u E - e,«• c .a. .a u m m aG. ` N s e T. > E.a L•uc E y mS Cq ea 4? 3� ^-°oma o � 'v.G a<e� mo<d� ► �d eOy Eci mc^ acs � ae � .5 m E 3 a n = T a•71 E• �J°r> aCy,.C-'aou.�vb�° -�Ae.rc 'eM' N `u' E7-�o�.'m .M q.��Y+ �EN� rOn"• �c,* mOmc-+• 'n .wUo, s�O -Ia -OO0. Q 3 om 'Oi Cai,N y y 7 p C j. V mL 3 W n V Q Gei-Y a Y ° Y c:,. ro .E ° L 5. crc co >,wEa0 O .{ w c .0$ �yQvvw' pv °cbr�roo .r vj 6 .0 •a Q „•, bAr .y`' 'u3 Y'. y'V eY. O'O'�{• oma. .ryi i y� N oOvim ui ori h v 00 0.^ 'd pL, - m dp u V m.,. a0.0-� G El d e o �' Y ` .•�.•cdv.;o a �' u a iS a m'E + ao aD Y=M N 3u+ 9oEaom' 3.� �� 01 v0 EA i. 0330 A �aa3 av6 � � Y � Q o0 ?Crao 9 E ~ '► 5 �"'rom CCV dwm 3 �L 6.+ m0 OSm �� Y m'G y^ E �� SaeLo cc„^ a: ° c �� do > o ro Y y « $ d E a o `3 > a+ w E E > d a od Q•�p .a � � ° °^� a � G 5 e d a��" O Y m.m �•a•c Y m 3�=°t:cu> .ou s►. �o E� o yAE m XT 7!4 >.e..E.n �,am, mY Am.°�.•-�° �>a a ;� tl•e�' mC ..`oc� > g 70 Yw � am+3 G.mL,. S � mYu� ��� .>.m °"' E " •, m ^a+� � u u > y ro cc E v m o �E .. y-a c « _ :, c 3 Eo ° � < x ¢� `''n .°. °' EE m:c"° ° aa and °-3 a c A.g � o v a c > � c YY Go Ea E' csEYY.'vau " ° >' YO c b Qt r u $ u �' ` " .. 0 3L m E.�..: �G �•'.' •C E •p m o .n fr E G ° Z V `o c E O �^v E c d a",.� `c E � F w••• °c � °' G `i�„^. �f•$« � �t u °,� C a 0 ° C m O a a� N .. O C C ^ U].E Uj .Y. u � .... ym �o!'.' y C .� C O c"• u• .o Q!='C�,- ••`'4r O• ` ' E 3 = ;c;ii u '•j �' c. , e•«' ? O' mN b =�•8 C L m sE ro 4 � vyL�r uw C u u a0 i Y v " o P ya Fi G c.M M v > o y a o o F uQ o d > 3 r o a 9 m Y m m o 6 v'fl ds; aosAdN v 00 E = o- OE « .a,CE � 0 O o G ° aO C OaPYi.5 soaPV,' g o l � .� oza >.- � a`+3- oad �3 °Y� & QE$ Y > �ma Y Y v VAI Sc a m� a c c >`" c 4 °S. w o m L 3 m Y ° .~0 6w T _0 0• $.9 ��� wl ax$ E3 ZS ,e.� o._ E- Om ° OL mw 0' �& OSm$ 2 Yqv c >,3m<` Y: « � c ; uSv G. wOv_ oum = ao.t� ,m, Y o ac m cm - W-A SFjO `w � GY« m .mo E � Edo a`2 fid.°! � _ y ° sC =5.2x o" V� 2 C tiYO ❑ V«• yy w m aa� - O0. k: r•a c ; `o w - x � �o o °m >) o �� >- am m - ; Q o0 u m w m > O $ 01 eo wc��- __ oo ccom _o PoY« dw > ° Q 3� � .a W ° so eaC, mo •tea v � u6 «� � « °'•:lJ' a °°°� au a� o.o ` Y c g m COY E 8a« E aEvvy °=_ � m S~ E: Xeg ° d 9 �0o mY�2 "�•� ax � A v 9E o Eroa' Gv=� N= mo L ?��« Z cx d6YdaD 0cr apQ � x m , .� v ° � >t S9---c c c °TM.p�uu g o � aY«« p oTo 0 oa5u N 3 i o T F �'m .° Y F•E m Y wo F n ::.. 3« -° m E m °� p Yw aiV 5m 7 oe ,; aD M u `" E v c ''E m B; Y ��Y,o m u .mY. m w o Y u Y ti •d o.� CO .� o �°.eaj79 Y .fl ,9- E+ 2m wa t a~ 6 aE. Eo ° d o33m« �E9 ">333 � >" v0u « � E `o > i« Q r? �« v« QOJ �e ._� moga� 6 > a y `279'i =� ads- rid m c �+ " 4 ..2 40 Y �O �.� c Q o c .a �' aF o ,; > o. ." $ > o`oc�3 8� c eEES ° 6 "> 08 Y �Qe4ao s� '�cnc Gat W 3 E � 4 � mO agQu� umNx Sm56 �< =o'' 80 ° °cool ]oog6a 'Y° v a a.a , a� ;v�O. . a Y E > �o S 3 a'a v Yi E >J � e $ $ o rd) > Ymuma uEv«s O c 5 g3 moQ 5mm O 92 u 9 0 9 ->o `-a$ �,-� « m �p m9 � u "• o Qp m`•Vpm es' CL � Mmm eoo9 ° o ° Ysr 43.- toiovyY > " gg °°� o �.9A o o > E c �B moo u3 u dad o'& aw `��O v•p co.5.r m a P �T, �G fi y O C �'° o m Vw u Y ryes .Y -o T.+ ° ° zg u r yM aY N d g „ E� a 5 c a °pesb' s = $ a ;, ed a p e0 V p p° �! �yL Y �1 9 T F !b O o °� N d l� �a0i Opp,T V O-O pyo. a T> a1 m N 16ii m q M T'•' a �°. `� ° =o a73Fd�. >' �d' .. N Fi Oi.�«� Oan �r36Y � a� V c & a o c ° ° w.m ._ o o «� °_° ma"r•5 = a E.,,� -^.a m,c m y ? c $. y o „ a0 Y �+co ._.a.v �-y; � � '�` ��g `. Z- 8 `o qo v 6 a d C s° u �« 3 o u 2 m� aw.c 4'$ o'.°^.. `� y � ° ma.$ «« ay.5 .'u °•"a oL In o E `m u c u ��`^- �o c o v•v a Z`._s v m u v 01 c * .. 0 a ` 6« 0 v m- Z'S c >wy.� c e 3 �"wy c°« >CGy c.c` a.� Qo > E � s' '� ' E� 10 � 6om� > om Y .3'`•�pJ = < " Sm$g3r ° 5 0 6 O V o V $o C 'o-9� o m C.� �; y'C O E = o~O Y C Y w•p ° ov w `o Ste' Y _� �3 � d`wu.go E� cNry : m T odcr.�m�.�. on o «•mOUYT.�- ..'e >,"G T_c o_ ca $ 6 i.� ac o:!!c o T m c o, S 3 .9 m m o g u m .s o .m ad: .. O o s >> r 1 _ o�c o$ a G_� $ �Q = � o m u � .T < w> Yac $� c c > v o y v " 8e•a5 sc $ a � o•o$m =°;� bo 8.4 t r r = Y a 3 8c ocm Y m '� _ o �' to T u a- e« 6 > 6 m o o; m rqY ° N ° V >$$ a c .5 ° o % q (� •� .� 0 0 Y Y a•^ Y,O 6 °.!�. u Y c.-�g•t7 m o.03 Y Y O w uYtl :S- '°9�? o$ mEg oyq m, « 0C bove ois« eZ� o m.m a.S4 ppcd �" u C. �aY Y m YYF° .ii'iC.°uumaEi Q4. '� � a9« uyc� g PUG � 3uY�y« E1�y oSd� mp m � o rp°, � ,9' co:c '3 q ,ui ga oao � oEcOr_ a_oom 3a ^.3 =: 'ymEuyy9X� � m9 .5 > Y > a o vi Y 33 0 4°4 6 ;L `°'= d= O_M.S� apa� a'.:•� i,-t' l 9�6 $ a g, 'C� .�, 0 9 '8 �o -9 p, Q a„�,4i'" �.ccC m mitiv"' o •p a � m a m3 �o ° Y >� ;'� 0. 4 0o uY ; 3 � °ccio�SS v� $°1 I a_ c u Y pTZT V$'rev o 9 a v3� A3 'o &3 ag< v -4. .6 A-.>^Y> Boo��S� v05 «.8a Q0 `ou o Y �w161%« : r« v �$ 0= � a5i oo33 °1 = Aiy Yo oo > us me�om Qao aSLu' EEV°08 moc��mgE �RRC �x�ys90 S.v YY : > N :' s ; u m o.8 E El a Y � E .' ; R 0. Fc U -S'o Y �`.o v ,W.7 E� SMS ouoCE.4 '+° d E`°,ue_odQp « >:�°+ '� ^` S .Y1m. � m.5 o 4� no �.< ,", � !� owm Y3c0G .' � =c ao? 3«IE go 0 ��, °, " °meocao"v >+mOemOe �.8r ,w ! [� > 7 M Y Y , ^ u u o�>., u�c e0 Yc� �L7va4m o« �' O �y oa°G °� 0 � '•.l� `YG � Elv > °�+j��naA E61 Cn7 a0 �3 8 O Y � .. V16Y 'r4ao Y ° V K C V m aKi o tea'&am� m,;, �° cV ��`: eLer dOo? ��•.l4m ��" �>a � � � �� � 04-21 .�'� - ^' a'sGdcE.vu �`� _ rie � O .50 � �' O G Y V m m 3 ! Y 1 u v Pigh 4 > 4 ° a �-`•3•a ! S v �•EK G T Y co pE$V ° .. A.2 '7 ' OyleY3.c"M qo r mw «o $ � 8vu v o > S� .Yo oa mu 0 ° $ g9 $ '� 8E� E 6 0 4 4.w 9 '• r _ a r e. 7, FNc3 E °v-°c� w� � s ° m VOA a ' Eco m� E ,� >b c "✓ cd E3v > a °� .V. ., - ,'r m V c'b ° `o d " y+ v a T % O m P V of y G Yrc o E `e _ = E (X 4?.� o a m v m� m Z Ebat d i u E E �c G d o ° d E Tc ev � a co �� c oEs e �On Q ea -j7 E u t o. 4 _ V S• m .c:: "v o >. F � F 2d Es, e Qm c aFm Eyp v a o > d r'.'_ <.;. r_ .: .`_ ri= r':- '=_m e•i ri::� e70m `mPj _ a, dym .m. _� Fm E^ « .� yiTl. '�'•'.j >> N P.v m o•D m C ;�« a'- y"`N+ c •_ W �� 5 � oma _ b.yc��� -s ^ = _ _ o.d'n �?; _m-pca`, °•cE �Jyu ..« NdM._ •.E-•'� � mCA $ a4N2 C" •= t?_ � W ugU4 atmcLooy4� Jin` a° �' 7'cc � " 3« E^�S� v«saoE'>v •Q N r 4 _ - G._ Oi G +i �. .0 O _ •p i.: d m � �,'. ° m m C d Q y > p 4 « w mt� �•_ <_ CC =' Ly � i9�Ji > n �� ii O'Q'uC0.?p dam 4'OJ^GyyWaF T�°i G.� •Q m' > o`� 'a V a F-a o V a = c3« a V °azc = " - > = ap '- c.c�._ mo'x�YN o ,`urE� r-O.0 E.n ud c $>a.EaE3.�•L0 ?7 ; °•iy0su cC7 d V u �' ••°' u a S.'. o �- u P S V d 4 ';' m .m.`• 99 EP86v rte _ i '�U� Essr =� ?.?b� a p8L3 "'"' °-' me_I'syW, �5 `o.o� a«os m� E,o.9 O s=- c°e ° ' - ei c _ c " > m c _ o -V c�� E c m o� > C sec.,yva`.�o.0eOb=a�e y` a�r. ? �No o°50_ m"o�:C..cpZ•..�c.. Eo�.�._`cr o3E", �cVv.�J.�.0°ci,uE4 �m - c E� Pcc > wg6o « °u ZdE;Swwm� a_. 9- ° V 4 c.c - i�s� Q ° ui > �v o v•d v c m S >, w 4w Y. E $" 1.3 f'. °„•v a Z. m°vUt Cv.c. ? >o yo O jcyd oGm= vv Cs•o aoi 'V^ aEo3m Wmmm3S� 4�acuVm`n �.e. tov --. e c m " " a � � moaO :: m�� Ed "S� wmeo >'oF �.-" mr ^'¢w S.c� 4. o m 4 _ o ° m O mo < � mmma " 4 Tri . -rm � m m .. oo3O C � Q�_ oeF... •� •- ao S-—a x—oc ° c o = _ -.• - m4 m a e > o « c 4E E .c c<.c°'m'n r' u .sc c>�.GN m w'E S.ao ;3m d g w m o✓ Ee<. _ O -V3 .. 6'a PP Cp a o c m a.>i 4 y .., as eco r-C s c'acn u G<c_ o �t c z a Vd =.5 u.c ❑ m. rd u oc mw >,- m d m E ap s C .V .c .�+ >.4 'O G 0.' am`+ ° '`" m m.0 G m G_ 0.'J O y•O F Y QG G7Op�L jC _ t = E — b•O'1^ m.Y TOv� o'^aUa•�O CE �O43 >,8 E�sY_ „ od f Y Y V 'j' C G C U 4-o b 4> ° m.c C y 4m 6eo v m d O 'Up::' Wm�n�r.r°!�ie•s"myv'o>>,P°>m,.'^.�o. -=a y'4°'� E -' - ``a-� - •';_� '- '-_'-- ^$a - 73am wLcV1. om�' �m Co Gg°v'°^�,sCd7OpE�oay°3°�a E-�p�.O9 �da��•od . 9 s>.°.wum a90 OO Z o dsVa$3.co�OuuE'� sm0 79 �� 'a v CCaJc:5t^;v.3 aom�-sW t4w 'o, mE o E3 E m d-� E a o� -Nr s �`-' a i m m O g'p m. 6 F .Q ~U. 0.�• m�' C O o m U ^ O N 'V' .+ G ° F Q m m G v d >.c d eo I t U c m .0 E,° �.' Ep v m=o~ o a6 P 7 `o W` i s v v m m e aD 0" o C u u _ <- e e E0.G.O > m ou + m e+-iO Z. O �• m� Qpo a a• 9 o-c c'v - w my T � at d o E o a u m«1s c t o d � � OgaY. a � � umm y 8 o4dm� m.S �•.9oEr�,'S o pJ oc " e •VOe' -4� Oi.° �� 4� $..m, °•y E1 ,5y � S `o.g >, o q car'-.3e >..c� �_�°�' u ; �y-� � o .°> � •ti 4. 'aOYa v�.� E•� m y Zcs o ipGa+ u" 'a y m y V O —��a $a p m Ld Cm > E« aa . c1ta O ° m ° mt 9 ..8m Zm.m G`o :3.0 Oyp V 'v -2o . 2C' rS o'meq.+aC O ai iQ' G• $C ywU u: > 1:02 e za20y ° mo o a° _ ' T n j. 'Ci> - >+ �`° �.. ii. p• 0• 6 •.. °1. .O M V 7 �e O',m ,c3 p ^� <'?$ V Sa am� q �`dw £ m a� .dy�w o n.m ma yeQQRBo� Ebb > ng a 8$ ax m y t C p .•y q �..G ypp i V �' y G N•.mC. E o O. eA a l rl' O c > 3 e c d Qyu� `a � o �Iaa- .� 9t � 2 ° ; y >- E > ma, : " C i. .Ey -S5 ��'03 S . --� 5 yo.0 :°•y•tf B "�� o E •� �a P'i 'ci a ° F` vn ,v'o ,� .. .+ �5 ° «m pS• `� 4 .. m w$ W Ee B Q M m G b i' �• -- O.a J V p`_. V n U J L.m ._'-. d 8 >,o W `A < — N F� � sc. ..c-� F'-, 5of K Faciuo`i t` � 2�u'-' c �aa,� > o � o€t O « ms Q 3 �,�o, u n - �".Fo.c o .o .ui V O cM o ! M O O 1'. r• K V :. c .� 71 v'O�.� .O b = 3 d O m v O c � 4 -?? k^ ..7 .ou,y c L __u •°Ei m �.S d a • . + rJ' L 6 n° 'au E•!;.'�':`• °' .�'.•d .^� `rm•N a.pc'. o > v G aNi d 'Jm m ti v so .+P A0. � r O or 7 S5 � c c a� 0 3 y•v 5 � 5 "� "� � i � � -' y r > d v o ba lg m c �s c q o• c o c. u .O ".n u d E' 7 0 o .o O c� O1= ��~ o�� u o V.p'S o `� N erg � .. o -��'' � o � o S �' ?' .M •d $ °e'+ v g o C • o C 6 d u m m d .. m "' �'; o y .oc .c "_ o `� > .S a s °' `` •c3 d o Y.' u QJ `�S t� c u o 9 Rt a S c o ug o �9 �0 o 7� d6 p 5 0 3 S V o� o. o 7 .d woo ..md. d m m '> 9 ''3 .. '° - c 5 m •� F m M i �.' '3 o kW v e' m `m,� F p, -boa $ d u u� ` �� •m od oo$ 6 p^' cc o e 'Eo '7 0 3 °'$ da m -v A .u� H G. �'.> F ° .9 7 e�C 1.8 .—m � E °�N � �e$�° o� �+ Or W a oo ^c �.5� � '38 `�.n � A C v`y u.. o w c o o 8 men `.aC, UO �� °ccdmmy ~o pc.� Q S tj sP m N 0. m ° a g w� � a �r O 'gyp rJ m rd ° m °. m �N"^.3 @ ° S c d c� p~ o n >•5 S «�F u O•.. 4. {i - O Si F 5. q 5 c 0.0 r w S m m tl o U o w m m e o o vd m Y•9 .�� 'y -' °,� o S $ �`"°' .a g 9 •s � � o .b � r..+ W >, � � w 'S w vt�•: � �d go om o m.9w mn c u 2ocasm cod 6r�' oc.� gSdo " y os c ° Tuc 5g u y Wa c ouG qsd' O 0 o p �'E�o w o� � m C d '� � � � O> vm TG M w°'� o�'�.^. •rMS �� �'� oOOca c y °«" c o c t m u � 9a ma5xo89 E m o ±'> a m o J s °'!S 3 'm ° A tl °gym m m 0.$�.5 a��°'� u- as v �,em�c �,Wsd, m cvGs, �@mAG � yy y o O 9. GO E 'u C T.S 'm�' @ q m 0 6 31 O u P a ai O' U U U h m V ' y G o d �O.+ C'�• m d < o d _ md� Qm� .c �oY.o . a'�� q to � m0 .� .. 4it 5`� �F T G cc-- O a9 �3 �ticC�='•'• o� 10 09'' t`.u. � � i,`^. muG -. m W V.' a� ° o. °.!�ro..��: ow c o�� t a o.� $ m• ao S.4 Cc .54^ w c.� ° o m- —. >v >S 1 ° �° d v o w yb asZ. 'C N G u dGJ•O t; o_ L i m •N D C L• d A d T C >, c o o F "G o 'd. a0 C.-. u F dM.". T d O f G P,E. y O'_^.,P P Y-• d T C C.'.+ EL ai y :d •u 7"V'C 9 C o N ti"� ✓:2 m 'd.� m Cl- Fl O G a _ T 7 m 5 Coif y m d j u O... a U O n 3 m C d 7 d o�V P•o L m m o 6 6.3 6 P -`O,P o g G T+ .a So 0o Gicx �? '� u d x � c yxGd FdE d � °� d Cv cs �j3� ` E7 �rd, 'O�� � `�� � ,cY.,�yu �n d � d�y�.y+ -YdG SNG ` 7m NGP ws 5 G �l�.G d� VEL � bw.5i GOA p� °Co� � C W am 06 m c e 5p 0svoo.54G� [qdqym � mEd oaua m �t aumC� y '� o ri. ow ,o, �a3e a-'- d R � � c `° d u �^ ... c Y c c $�m �.,w q-2 C7 e m zx G a CO) e0 @O E o tmi g a d.5 e�� � m m y �t � ? �� s d o d C C� -T� m a ° a'b � pma � a, � WFwdTv E dvSoP E oa9 5g y n oxVm o o� c [Q 9m w... � .Pv7 7 O u m V � 7 �' y^, C Gb d po•y� U6:y vl ° u d O O P •C n'w a 3 y m Y �1 `-' a� C Q y•Gd m.�... ~~ tOi'C 7 0 M1 E Eai Y-cw�` apy C.e =�- a � 7S � wg.4�' V V Ca N ra o a- r aoyc> `o z. Fuo tl TwO e2� a ^ g@ >e? a eo 8 � � a3GEOEa� a$ � g � � oa9 � m 6� 3 PG e�� MmBm 9a area . °EJ yetl � ao5g �!o0... 9.9 ae8b Cp Y, o 5a ragc Y $.92 'a' ca Y °ao��' `a';•.. a V rQ•� 0.. G C. y 'U y e— a a+ E G o o q C y G O o. O o o W o a c d °> � o uac vv �..zm4c ° s9YO w a89 ''F+ o y 9 .s � M9 eTb w qas ea��.5� . �� 79 J-1 u Yo g > C' d • Yc ;;� o mo9B � 2 o Oe 9 3i $v$ "�° g co79" Y e Y 9 m.8 °1 X Oti '9 O ov ''= r ..•a�m y'$ :> 7 yya V �y � O'��•pa � � tl a0 w rj G .aha • ac is g � .. � d v3w o�nc9do5�mermeo. no s0d. o230-oapaE 0 eat 5O mo md2-E-okoo a 5 o 9xovcr ci 'Ivl .9 O oq Z co$ a o'$ `scdi ocm u O8 °^ mS�y uo' c� "7 ao m II Y S'Sqq„ �o p v'�;o c, c tuq� y yy _ a: 5 0 �=- e m ° >,@ m•a'' y •U m m O. Y 6 o N'O V}Y'.� a! Y C C d M o t a0.~.OS o 7 eJL 4.76 AO Pi G� md' S� a Y O V P }• ,0•� .c� V�Co3 �bO�� n _.o � mH.a � ,O� � si cl) 8,0-6 m0.� A E e rA m m bA ua a 35 S YQ O d C7 m m° pe« cye'-s« n«� w� F v� � o _ _ a�.9 m c c Dx yy ao A+x a c•° ra o" c c E o $ o ;? o p p«__ c 3� :.. O �:.�-.z $ �.� �•p LCsu u u''! g•� T u.^d •"l7 O m m G 4 Q iL Q m mpvQVOt.o,.I v�u4�ec Mu.$o..��a5.T`A«Vou•«AS3�T.7ucv.°c m$ kAWa.�'dUiW�K7�'o,t: 'mH Qc3.m�cp:��•%-•>YEc'�_•g �ao%o.. amuH a`Um,«o-"3•«�Cca,b�ay cv�ao.«aE mco mfi°'w•yEmcY u`�; 9.50.•om�w 'b�yu' oE •«�0.Y A.QEaa wOvN"al acE«.q8a�mu.�«m6fiu�..nm,-,vS"u 4FxU OS•a9 Qmm Muco > ,. " EaF."ma —0 o syVmcl) « e al c co > w� °« a �E v'•uJ�a0 lQwn«��aui ALq c E. a,• m g°o o E �.":l„-• o o 5 u o u - o f y a nHEO. �A Z' Y.5a t- � � 2 � ToxC H'o•p u �''.'� .�.. 6•p a U h u h O 0 a.Q x•b d x x A x m a x G'.O a A rid ,Su9 �tE�s` ^sE � @ cammE« @ o', Ho �� o[ mFGdaE. F_ FFWCUE °Y �� �� Ou to a_. >•a.�.Gv—�•T�+� y 11� 4V1Y0 W � O �r a �yaY � mO o3oyc� cET c .G d O C m A m 0.r Y Y m 9•E.= — E E. Y 8 E � $� (L pN r-. -.s W a �"v x 'O m s n O C 1 C •c Ya a m ° 7 � 3 ° y��-0 A T^ cvc ?A uv �a cxas a m Er GS >q�°e Tcs ysoc2 a �� � �'smq�p�j�'m�o� �a^'dau a 00«cu>'OaGGoq7 «amc Cu YC .ooc�O:oNuca 0.c4oYE vYYooYa.cO•.Ta`cYG,wC..FTuma_,.s��.a�oYam,.«9uum«�aY Gx°Ym.wsx-_5Ya$..«'•w��S��fi�•Cd5aydm C moi�cEyl x«.^• 5Yco.O. �man "a aN5°Now « yo «x a� Udc ob . iEa O• . 0 > Wg me C, .. u.9p ;;:G SIcod.GdA 1^ N « CcM ' � VEc tY« V- -S.5 haz a 5 E a >>oo c o fio00 > QmoSo3ox0WYcd� d=E >°u U --cY 0 Ec EWcx o'u p .3TxE Aoo aa 02 A-0 5-0 t5a c N GuV C m 0.5 mU °9.y• S .. eYo o, E AE o �:. �;, m o ° 5..5�•'" T", E a ? �'S`y•�o am aa+ o� ac c•�' VY4..0 .T. a,Jco,3 o«� ; 3 ao qE r..5 cEA �vYs ' E & 5 fi= m �� fi I vmmittn `agog v.at xs `.=_ 8 ` doo� wage a.5 m3� a � •at� cX �r�rrirr�rr.rr��rrr.rrmrr.�rr.>�w w r.+..�.�r�rw+.+�wrnw..a C V 1 yOCOE C O3 G. d ° V^'ww0 :Z c.5 ec N e 6o E m U m A > o F u aG p c. 0 «mom+ 7 3 0 ' C 7 '� m L b Y - O U V E O V O C b o y'� C p m y N d U y U y m b C C Vi C m._ C'm L'x .0.. O °tC C9 A ° ° ^«j c 60 coca > ao yy °e y m c E c o E e u Y ^p c - ,�+ m. a c C�' r C .. A i c^• �+ 'b a� 7 0 9 a 4 a O0 7 C m« Y'o c" `c > ❑ a c o 3 yN0 «•^a o c ur 0. ,u, - 5,? m._� cuOc� $ a� � � o _ Yw >, c< E� - mw w3s p a w w ?.` G 0.«i .QZ 4 6 ` ��.m G O m ° 6� m u chi a�� C ?� aL'd '�.E � cW.�< ao0a �u0 « edso mdd c" a ° u�u a c > o W �vs m•a cs «...A .>c.V'_'� ..m•c -3 w o.m �' fi '00 .a C7_. - 0 sy ao mm 3.0 VWd Pt�.9Gw•g�9uo"4�c�uC=v.U�me_«.a9 "xvmdcx.ss"cm_yy ,o�.0u •tvnvoC�`.°Ca>°x�ooi «e�Ywc>m�meF V0•�O;�} tAFEo>i �0$m o2Fva8+GdTa Q�qmC.•cN'•'�79'e.Oa .cxv•'.��ao. Am�wCaaw«�mm •..«ZW p« 0 $,IA 3 C m A o v . W lO a W NA cv �Em`oq a 00 ^ ua > w N 2— ^ u.Z a ,o0u u ' vO ° : > b'm oa >•°F0 r7 > 'Leee 3 < u.9 �.2,Lu .�' t v 3`.• v'.,� � 5� Sm ... x � .$ AEoE Ax.,. � yy p f� �O + _ N o O N g C �m O N ° O q A O m t O x00.+C A ° E a a .S V O v s y O V 3 E-6 E . 101: �r[Wa•�. yO Z 5toa,I uYB Fa C•do3 s.. $g A8a$8p A8$8m.�Y oma?Y- A8a y $age mc 8Y Q° aug+ ssia J8COto 09 aONd Y88C xeo a88S ' $m 9C00 a >_O O o A Ma yo Wo aon c•a0 $ cv $ o -0 -0 gU.B. Vmc aVOe9a ,-. o s Z C_ eo Vai > '� G S $ '•� Op Y C �O Y V1 yO �. ao a' aaao a.o 2. d ap dEa �O va u 5.s c E m'Y4 a gc $a a °_° q 8$ 8$ u " gyp d � .amm 0. a E a $ Ya dor v E caE p 3 p c5� o552� $, o m m � cow 0552� 0 800.°�km. O+ ° >o N � gi • 'a a N •1 v y n LO to � c`r� `cr3 Et Z c � o cliCCa N O Y Y Y M O w m o a 'g u 13 i Y ..s Y w a 93 u �.�. raw a^.G.lia•w+� - •�4.re .. TO 40 1 1 �, 4 i dt (.i / p,_ ` \ R. 1x'1•./1 I !. nJ / V 4 neq R ♦ r c R� � R f BS O son 1; I'sT ALWTR A ' $+ w. C,s ST. !.. �1 / - f I I ��/ s SM. A t A8 � sv. .� m / ' �.� S ..-.•J \;laao . � � / vvvm Itg t' lip I/ �� LL iV [ek'ffi26Si BT. n R S M`r., x0.L- IS. 6'9' P80 IHR€! $o ;: ir�-� ` ..t.�`•m• �a j °' s.- y � x Ssts env•cT. ,`••* +� r g 5.... TRUCKS ra ao y� . ,il! r•a „ 75. ♦ A•xi v csao/s .L CM SE \ 4 T� �$ 1 p ON a I : C ROAD �p rD 11 $ r Ci.�- n LAND s e i O DURHAM s s" Q ri 8 w ? �4 vrcM t ACL i.a e0,11 Sit x i.v. \1A R t`. s fM. f crr �' 20,000 lbs w.aca G.V.W. yL1 > V ° --- 9L 6BST w R. a .• .> RPT I NG w To v t I ^4 copra - [xERDLDSe NTS. g i l DR. ST 9 !1 SM. Ip oom. It .M. d AYTL[R T AQfi SE~ 1 i E aagV ix XAS T 1- 1 e C , ,. /$.aoo'.9 r .•san�•N i yes ,�� DLR&IRx n 4�ve �� a`♦A ,.;[ a ga Jl x �� 34 ou*Km SSS. J vC':7 V SS L'41.' NO THRU l TRUCKSJtu[4 PL. ! SYLY 0N u _ eeq iV ROAQ „ 4 DURHAM n I `/ OYER _ � ,, R � » . a 20,000 lbs I K ! `ft , ' P0 THRU G.V.6 . TRUCKS RATING `� r ON _d � - 1 a DURHAM + ,. AD. � ROAD N0 THRU ' OVER TRUCKS 20.000 lbs •.� L '� :_. M' �r� a ON or . g , I I ixA®ntL G.V.W.G4' EiSum LA � DURHAM RATING OVER Ia.3xa F ' �. a ! ' j 20,000- lbs G.V.W. s.M. twsuTlR - RATING 12 EVM MOULP 11984- I W r— Q ry f CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON MEMORANDUM � E t TO: City Administrator and Council Septemt*,r 21, 1.984 FROM: Capt. Jennings SUBJECT: Durham Road Truck Traffic Weight limitation In the last memorandum prepared (9/14/84), I :Mated from research through ORS and in discussion with Washington County Deputy District Attoniey Dave Peters, that the classification of a violation of weiqht restriction under authority € of ORS 487.905 would be an Unclassified MisderTipannr. This is true, however, under provisions and authority of ORS 483.996, there are conflicts with 487.905 on prescribed penalties. I had earlier asked for cemmments and suggestions through a letter to Scott Upham, Washington County District Attorney, in reference to the County Minute Order 84-151, and the problems of enforcement. Scott called 9/20/84 and said he felt a violation under the ORS 483.996 penalties for weight violations is the appropriate action. It was further discussed about what court has jurisdiction, and he interprets the law to mean that the law enforcement agency who is enforcing a County Ordinance must use District Court as court of venue. However, if the City of Tigard under authority of ORS 487.905 enacts an ordinance in concert with the {, County's ordinance, then the Tigard Police Department could cite into Municipal Court according to the District Attorney. In summary, I was advised County Council is preparing an ordinance that will place a 20,000 GVW limitation of truck traffic on S.W. Durham Road, which will be on the County Commissioner's regular meeting agenda set for September 25, 1984 at 6:30 p.m. Although this is a consent agenda item, I will be attending to testify if necessary for the City. The Summerfield area people have been advised of this. iy►�1 Capt. Kell D.' J s Executive fi KDJ:ac (durham/2) l� PAUL V.PHILLIPS WASHINGTON COUNTY DISTRICT 9 ' REPLY TO ADDRESS INDICATED: .' 7 House of Representatives 1< Salem.Oregon 97310 J 15075 SW.Dawn Ct. Tord.Oregon 97223 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SALEM, OREGON 97310 September 21 , 1984 Ima Scott 14873 SW 106th Tigard, OR 97224 Dear Ima: I would like to express my appreciation to you for alerting me of the continued problem with Durham Road. As we dis(:Issed, I was under the impression that the wt,j ,;i'1t 1 .u:,it for trucks had resolved most of the outstanding issues . For your records, however, f I would like to recount my actions pursuant to your call. As I advised you, a call was made to Wes Myllenbeck, Chair of the County Commission. Wes was unavailable at that moment but returned my call the next morning. When we spoke, I expressed the problem, as I under- stood it to be. Essentially, the Tigard Police would not enforce the weight restriction at the advice of their counsel and, thus , the residents of Summerfield, and all others along Durham Road, were being unfairly effected by truck traffic. Wes advised that he would investigate and call back, which he did just a few days later. He said that he had spoken with Washington County Highway officials who in turn would meet with Tigard officials, including the Chief of Police and get back to Wes . He recounted the apparent problem of interpretation of State Law but during his follow up calls did say the sign would be reposted and that State Highway Officials would Ima Scott September 21, 1984 z Page Two assist with this . The matter will be brought before the entire commission on September 25 at Wes ' request. There is no doubt he did a fine job following through with our inquiry, keeping me advised, and initiating action at the county and city levels . Finally, at your suggestion, I notified both Eunice Day and Dave Atkinson of the results . You may have heard back from both by now. 1 would like to thank you for allowing me to assist in this issue. As you know, I have been involved with the traffic problems on Durham Road for some time now. This seems to be another chapter in the continuing process . It is my sincere hope that the Tigard Police Department will feel able to enforce the posted limit . Commissioner Myllenbeck felt this posting clarification would be preferred by them. If you have any questions or further concerns, please feel free to contact me. Sin ely, - J � au V. Phillips State Representative District #9 PVP/sld i t { k_ , 17 umm�r �l CIVIC ASSOCIATION 10650 S.W. Summerfield Drive Tigard, Oregon 97223 620-0131 September 21, 1984 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Tigard City Hall Tigard, OR 97224 Gentlemen: The community of Summerfield wishes to voice our appreciation to Paul Phillips and Ima Scott, for their assistance in getting the Durham Road Truck Weight Proposal on the agenda of the Washington County Commissioners' meeting which is scheduled for September 25th. It was through their initiative that this issue was scheduled on the agenda and we are happy to see the support given to this project that is so important to the residents of Summerfield. Sincerely, SUMMERFIELDD/ CIIV�VIC ASSOCIATION Ken Cheeley President / CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON t COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: AGENDA ITEM �►: (P _ DATE SUBMITTED: Sept. 20, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: Planning Commission ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Council Review approved on 8/8/84 CC postpone 9/10/84_ of Planning Commission Action - REQUESTED BY: 1 Puget Corporation DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: --� WN CITY ADMINISTRATOR: s INFORMATION SUMMARY The review of the Puget Corporation approval was scheduled for Council consideration on September 10, 1984, however, the Puget Corporation requested a postponement until September 24. Please bring the materials provided to you for the September 10, meeting. i + f i ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 4 { SUGGESTED ACTION C CITY OF TIGARO OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: September 10 1984 AGENDA ITEM #: DATE SUBMITTED: Sept. 5 1984 _ PREVIOUS ACTION: Planning Commission ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Appeal of A royal - Au ust 7 1984 SOR 8 84A Puget Corporation. Review_ REQUESTED BY: of Planning Commission Decision DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR: — INFORMATION SUMMARY On August 20th the City Council voted to take up on its own motion the Planning Commission action which allowed Puget Corporation to provide a non-remonstrance for half-street improvements rather than the actual improvements at the time of development. The Council should evaluate the Planning Commission's action in light of the Comprehensive Plan and its own policy as it relates to public improvements. The applicant's brief, copy attached, outlines the issues and options available to the City. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1, Vote to allow the Puget Corporation to provide a non-remonstrance agreement in place of public improvements at the time of development. 2. Vote to require half-street improvements at the time of development. SUGGESTED ACTION The City Council should determine what its policy is in terms of half street improvements. 0615P dmj MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Members of the City Council September 4, 1984 FROM: William A. Monahan, Director of Planning and Development SUBJECT: Puget Corporation - Appeal of Condition of SDR 8-84A The Planning Commission on August 7, 1984, granted Puget Corporation relief from a condition of development relative to half-street improvements. The Commission voted to allow the filing of a non-remonstrance agreement for improvements to Bonita and 74th rather than requiring improvements at the time of development or bonding. The Commission removed conditions 1, 2, and 3 shown below. 1. Standard half-street improvements including sidewalks, curbs, street lights, and driveway aprons shall be provided along the 74th Avenue and Bonita Poad frontage. 2, Seven (7) sets of plan-profile public improvement constructions plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a registered civil engineer, detailing all proposed public improvement shall be submitted to the City's Engineering Division for review. 3. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Division has issued approved public improvement plans (the Division will require posting of a 100% performance bond), the payment of a permit fee and a sign installation/streetlight deposit. Also, the execution of a street opening permit or construction compliance agreement shall occcur prior to, or concurrently with the issuance of approved public improvement plans. The Council and Comprehensive Plan policies specified that upon development half-street improvements must be provided. The Council determined on August 20, that this approval should be reviewed and discussed. A copy of the staff report from the August 7, meeting is attached containing the SDR approval and applicant justification for the relief. 0615P dmj AGENDA ITEM 5. 1 August 7, 1984 MEMO TO: Planning Commission FROM: Keith Liden, Planning Department ,L[- RE: SDR 8-84 Puget Corporation On .Tune 24, 1984, the Planning Director approved SDR 8-84 subject to conditions including additional right-of-way dedication and half-street improvements. The applicant objections to conditions one through four . which require the dedication and improvements. Enclosed is a copy of the Planning Department decision and the applicant's appeal letter. 1 'rn:Zt2r-T �._" MILLER. NASH. WIENER. HAGER 6 CARLSEN ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 111 S. W. FIFTH AVENUE PORTLAND. OREGON 97204-3699 .ODCPT D."ILL[. J.rw.«.L."C.OLc TCLEP/.ONE 15031 22..5656 TMoNAO C.f.ND P.CO-O.C.—c—C—cc L."P C.NAS. .IC"A.O A.[OWAROS M.CMA[L C.APINUP JO".TMOM I.DOODLING "O.MAN J."C"CP D—O"."V"1.0 TELE.364462 KINGMAR PAM TL MA.LUS.V 0--O w.M[.CN[P ONVAL O.-AOC. JOHN N.S—ACUSCM ST(VC"O.POS[M LOUIS G.MC..T CLIrrOwD M.C.NLS[N.J.. LOUIS D.LIVINGSTON [VCACTT P."ONCLA"O —C-.[VCTTC..C. JOHN—MILL G.TODD"OPVCLL JOMN r.M(VP(.T KURT A.KP.[G[P CUITTIS W.CUTSrOPTM P(TCP C..KMT[w N.P.ANN rwA«T( JA"[S r.OULCICM "AUP1C[D.OCO.00S DONALD A.DUNS COVNSCL DONALD P.DOV.G... WILL.—K MALTCPS YAP.C."CCLA"A"A" X.CMANO A.CA"AOA. JON«M.OfOV.N Sao^"D.OOMCPTV NAPa A.A"O(.SON OO".LO P."OL"A" PICMANO A.CA«fUN K[VIM O.PADwICK "(L.NOA S.CDC. AC"-CT".Y.N(11O[MMAft M.C-01 TIC"CL"[w JCrr.C.J.O.VC.NAN PAUL A.P.VLICN �1Ll1AM D,CNO.V G^..A.M.MICAS Or COVMf(L JANCT t(".•.L Ow[6rfC G.CGOP♦A.CNAIMDV MAwv Cr C.SAN. CAN DAVID C.CULP(PPCw GPANf f,ANO(PSOM Jcrrw[.C.TMCO[ ...G.RCT►10.1"0 D(NALO A.IWO[D[ JA.CS M.NESTK,DOO JON"f.PUMCCLL LINOA L."ANSNALL rw(OwIC A.•[wa( .CCC OLV M.MCLLf TAL"ADGC CONNAO L.CMAIM VJ.DNIS ff. NARK! DCA"O.O(CNAIN[ O["N.f R PAIVUMDON D.VIO KI.0/1Ow" JC rrw[♦O.AUSTIN ..ALAN PIG"T DOM".N.CA"(POM J[rr.(V D."ILL"E" C-.C.w."[.RILL.J.. DAVID M."ORT"LANO JON'«J.at NOTT June 29 1984 D•C-0".."CIS[" w(D(CC.S.WILSON ODUGLAf".P.GC. ORUCC A.PUDIM r Ms. Lorraine Wilson Deputy City Recorder 12755 S.W. Ash Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: Appeal of Puget Corporation of Oregon from SDR 8-84 Dear Ms . Wilson: • Enclosed is notice that Puget Corporation of Oregon ( "Puget" ) is appealing from decision SDR 8-84 . We understand that there is no fee for filing this notice. Puget hopes to undertake and complete construction of the facilities that are the subject of its original application during the summer months. We therefore request that the Planning Commission hold a hearing on this matter as early as possible. Ver truly yours, ichard A. Edwards C r NOTICE OF APPEAL OF PUGET CORPORATION OF OREGON Puget Corporation of Oregon ( "Puget" ) hereby gives notice that it is appealing site development review decision SDR 8-84 ( "Decision" ) . The Decision was filed and notice given by the Director of Planning and Development ( "Director" ) on June 19, 1984. Puget is the party that filed the application to which the Decision is directed . Puget appeals from the Decision on the grounds that: (1 ) no findings were made as to timeliness of street improvements or as to support by surrounding property owners for such improvements , ( 2 ) the improvements required by the Decision are unnecessary, and ( 3 ) satisfactory guaranties that improvements will be made when needed are available and should be accepted in lieu of present street improvements. 1. The Decision contains no findings that street improvement would be timely or that improvement would be supported by surrounding property owners. The Tigard Community Development Code ( "CDC" or "Code" ) imposes street improvement obligations on property . owners planning a development. CDC § 18 . 164 . 030 . Those obligations include the construction of standard half-street improvements and dedication of rights-of-way. The Code contains an exception to the requirement that a property owner meet pose obligations at the time development takes place. Immediate improvements need not be required if - 1 - "the City Engineer determines that a required street improvement would not be timely, or (if ] lack of support by the other property owners would prevent a complete street improvement. " CDC § 18 . 164 . 030.A. 3. If a property owner requests t:-•:-` ir-•lediate compliance with the improvement standards of the Code not be required, CDC S 18 . 164 .030 .A. 3 thus suggests that findings should be made as to timeliness of and support for improvements. Without such findings, it is impossible to determine whether the request may be granted . Puget has requested that it be allowed to give a guaranty of future improvements in lieu of present improvements . Findings as to timeliness and support therefore should have been, but were not, set forth in the Decision. 2 . Conditions 1 throu h 4 of the Decision re uire that Pu et make unnecessar im rovements. a..t CDC § 18. 164 .030 clearly contemplates that street improvements should not be required when unnecessary. The Decision requires that Puget make improvements that are completely unnecessary in light of the absence of any similar improvements in the area, the high probability that such improvements would not benefit anyone and the fact that no similar improvements will be made near Puget' s property in the foreseeable future. Curbs, gutters and lights are almost completely absent along both Bonita Road and 74th Avenue. Bonita Road extends approximately from Lake Oswego through Tigard. Along its entire length, there exist only about 125 feet of sidewalk. l 2 - The roadway has curbs in only a very limited number of locations. 74th Avenue is not flanked by sidewalks or curbs at any point. Additionally, street improvement in the form of widening Bonita Road or dedicating additional right-of-way would benefit no one . The bridge which carries Bonita Road across Fanno Creck near the west side of Puget's property is narrower than the existing roadway. According to information available to Puget, there are no plans to widen this bridge. Any widening seems extremely unlikely in light of the fact that the bridge is the only one crossing Fanno Creek which meets existing construction standards. This bridge will therefore likely be the last of those bridges crossing the creek to be widened. There is no sign that similar improvements , which might make improvements by Puget sensible, will soon be made in the area. The land across the street from Puget' s property is vacant, and there is no indication that it will soon be developed. Adjoining properties on both Bonita Road and 74th Avenue contain no improved frontage. There are no sidewalks, curbs or street lights near Puget' s property, and the construction of such facilities in the foreseeable future is unlikely. A' Therefore, the improvements required by conditions 1 through 4 of the Decision are unnecessary. The burden of constructing those improvements should not be placed on Puget at this time. s 3 - 3. Satisfactory guaranties by Puqet that future improvements will be made when needed are available and should be accepted in lieu of present street improvements. CDC S 18.164 .030 .A. 3 provides that the City Engineer may accept a guaranty of future improvements in lieu of present improvements. Puget is willing to give the City of Tigard E a promise, agreement, or covenant running with the land that will provide such a guaranty. Puget ' s offer should be accepted by the City in lieu of present street improvements. PUGET THEREFORE APPEALS from Decision SDR 8-84 on the grounds stated herein and requests a hearing de novo by the Planning Commission pursuant to CDC § 18. 32. 320.A. MILLER, NASH, WIENER, HAGER & CARLSEN Ri hard A. Edwards John Osburn ! i Attorneys for Puget Corporation f of Oregon i f i G C 4 - f NOTICE OF DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 8-84 APPLICATION: By Puget Corporation for Site Development Review approval to expand an industrial facility and to obtain Sensitive Lands Permit to allow excavation and fill in the 100-year floodplain. The property is zoned I-P (Industrial Park), 7440 SW Bonita, Tigard (Wash. Co. Tax Hap 2S1 12A, Tax Lot 800). DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director for the City of Tigard has APPROVED the above described application subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the Director based his decision are as noted below. A. FINDING OF FACT 1. Background A Site Development Review (SDR 17-73) was granted in 1973 which allowed the expansion of an existing building. A loading area was provided with a driveway onto 74th Avenue. A parking area and landscaping was also installed on the north and east side of the building. The applicant originally applied for a Sensitive Lands Permit (SL 4-84) to allow excavation and fill within the 100-year floodplain. However, after discussing the proposal further with the City Engineer, it was determined that the building expansion could occur without encroaching upon the Fanno Creek floodplain. As a result, the applicant withdrew the Sensitive Lands application (see June 13, 1984 letter from Derek Hogarth). 2. Vicinity Information The I-L (Light Industrial) zone applies to the north and east. The I-P (Industrial park) zone includes the property to the south. The only other industrial use in the immediate vicinity lies to the east. Apartment buildings zoned R-12 (Residential, 12 units/acre) are located on the western side of Fanno Creek. 3. Site Information and Proposal Description The northeastern portion of the property is developed with an industrial building and the remainder is vacant. Fanno Creek and the 100-year floodplain occupy the western section of the parcel. The applicant is requesting approval for a 23,000 square foot addition to the existing industrial building. A supplemental 1,500 square feet of office space may be installed in conjunction ( with this project or at a later date. NOTICE OF DECISION - SDR 8-84 - PAGE I 1 4. Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division has the following comments: a. An additional 5 feet of right-of-way should be required along the entire property frontage. Bonita Road is a collector route and 74th Avenue is a local street which require right-of-way widths from centerline of 30 and 25 feet respectively. b. Half-street improvements including curbs and sidewalks which meet City standards should be required for the frontage for Bonita Road and 74th Avenue. The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District indicates the fire hydrants must be provided within 250 feet of all portions of the structure and automatic sprinkler protection or fire separation walls will be required. The NPO #5 Chairman met informally with the applicant and it was mutually agreed that three or four additional willow trees should be added to the landscaping plan between the building and the apartments to the west. B. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION The reivsed site plan was submitted reflecting the right-of-way dedication and half-street improvements noted above. The expansion is consistent with the use, setback, lot coverage, and height requirements of the I-P zone. The parking area with driveways onto Bonita Road is proposed to include a one-way drive with 24 parking stalls angled at 45 degrees on both sides. Six additional spaces are shown on the eastern side of the property. The applicant estimates that -the largest shift will contain 30 people. The Code requires one parking space per employee for the largest shift and therefore the parking will be adequate. A portion of the necessary landscaping was installed as required by the SDR 17-73 approval. Supplemental landscaping work is proposed along the north and west side of the new addition. The street trees and other plantings shown on the north side of the building conform with the Code requirements. The landscaping and screening chapter of the Code (18.100) requires development in an I-P zone to provide a 20-foot wide landscaped buffer area with screening when adjacent to an R-12 zone. The Fanno Creek floodplain will provide a natural buffer greater than 40 feet in width. A sight obscuring fence or hedge is required by the Code to fulfill the screening requirements. However, Section 18.100.080 A. 4. f. allows for alternative solutions to comply with the screening requirements. The amendment to the landscaping plan (to provide additional willow trees) suggested by the NPO and the applicant appears to be a suitable approach. NOTICE OF DECISION - SU . 8-84 - PACE 2 C. DECISION Site Development Review SDR 8-84 is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Standard half-street improvements including sidewalks. curbs, street lights, and driveway aprons shall be provided along the 74th Avenue and Bonita Road frontage. 2. Seven (7) sets of plan-profile public improvement construction plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a registered civil engineer, detailing all proposed public improvement shall be submitted to the City's Engineering Division for review. 3. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Division has issued approved public improvement plans (the Division will require posting of a 100% performance bond), the payment of a permit fee and a sign installation/streetlight deposit. Also, the execution of a street opening permit or construction compliance agreement shall occur prior to, or concurrently with the issuance of approved public improvement plans. 4. A street right-of-way dedication of 30 feet from the Bonita Road centerline and a 25-foot right-of-way dedication from the 74th Avenue centerline shall be provided. The description for said dedication shall be tied to the centerline as established by County Survey #20,593 and #20,387. In lieu of the additional 5-foot right-of-way dedication along Bonita Road, a 25-foot right-of-way from centerline and a 5-foot wide public easement will be acceptable. The legal descriptions shall be approved by the Engineering Division and recorded with Washington County prior to issuance of building permits. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, a revised landscaping site plan shall be submitted for Planning Director's approval showing a minimum of three additional willow trees on the west side of the building located in such a manner as to prevent future problems with the USA sewer line. 6. This approval shall be valid for the period of one year from the final approval date. D. PROCEDURE 1. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: XX The applicant b owners XX Owners of record within the required distance NOTICE OF DECISION - SDR 8-84 - PAGE 3 XX The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization YY Affected governmental agencies 2. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON June 29, 1984 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. 3. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is June 29, 1984 4. (questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 12755 SW Ash. PO Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223, 639-4171. William . Monahan, Director of Planning 6 Development ATE APPROVED (KSL:pm/0480P) �• I �--S JEC1 I I�� NOTICE OF DECISION - SDR 8-84 - PACE 4 General Chain flat Co. �L P_O. Box 13333 SDR -8-84 SL 4-84 Tigard. OR 97223 PUCET CORPORATION CRANUii Ceotfrey Levear P.O. Box 1530 7440 SW Bonita Road Portland, OR 97207 Tigard, Oregon 97223 DAVIS/STARKWEATHER Puget Corporation George Lund 7415 SW Bonita Road 2101 So. Mildred Tigard, OR 97223 Tacoma, Washington 98466 NPO f 5 Hercer Industries Debra Naubert P.O. Box 10016697210 14365 SW 80th Place Portland. 8 Tigard, Oregon 97223 BROWN/KITTI,ESON National Safety Co. P.O. Box33 301 NW KU�tRAY ROAD OR 97223 Portland, OR 97229 Tigard, L,.ICK/RARRINGTON HARRINGTON 7205 East Lake Court 9SW BaBlvd. Wilsonville, OR 97070 Portland, tland, OOR R 97219 Columbia Sunday School 7455 SW Bonita Road Tualatin, OR 97223 DOBSON 10205 SW Highland Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 LOUIS/KOEBER 9320 SW 74th Portland. OR 97223 'r'cNNANT 0. Box 1658 Portland, OR 97207 c 18.164 STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS FF 18 164.010 Purpose t The purpose of this Chapter is to provide construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers and drainage. 18.164.020 General Provisions A. Unless otherwise provided, the standard specifications for construction, reconstruction or repair of streets, sidewalks, curbs and other public improvements within the City shall occur in accordance with the standards of this Code. B. The City Engineer may recommend changes or supplements to the standard specifications consistent with the application of engineering principles. C. No vehicles on a building construction site shall be allowed on unimproved surfaces. 0. The provision of Section 7.40 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply to this Chapter. 18.164.030 Streets A. No development shall occur unless the development has frontage or approved access to a public street. 1. Streets within a development and streets adjacent to, shall be improved in accordance with this Code. 2. In addition, any new street -or additional street width planned as a portion of an approved street plan shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with this Code. 3. Where the City Engineer determines that a required street improvement would not be timely, or where lack of support by the other property owners would prevent a complete street improvement, the City Engineer may accept he Public uture improvement guarantee in a form approved by Works Director. and g, Creation of.way Rights-of-way for Streets dshall be c eated throughthee approval of Purposes. Rights-of-winal subdivision plat or major partition; however, the Council may approve the creation of a street by acceptance of a deed provided that such street is deemed essential by the Council for the purpose of general traffic circulation. 1. The Council may approve the creation of a street by deed of dedication without full compliance with the regulations applicable to subdivisions or major partitions if any one or more of the following conditions are found by the f Council to be present: III - 309 PUGET P CORPORATION OF OREGON 7440 S.W-BONITA ROAD • PON I LAND.OREGON 97223 POP.TLANn PHONE:(5031 639-3139 TOLL FREE (800)547-9690 August 6, 1984 Planning Director City of Tigard Burnham & Ash Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Planning Committee Menlber: We at Puget of Oregon understand the int rationshe and desires of the City Council in regards to street improve Puget does, however, feel that there feelsthatmarked theredisfarcertaintrule ofsrcasonal and industrial land use. We also that should be applied when asking for these improvements. One of our concerns is that Puget is being asked to improve a portion of Bonita- 0 Road and 74th Avenue in a Planner that iialquite inconsistent with theshOWtrestuo;`vu ,�_ 72nd, Bonita Road, Can-lien ll in ing roadsides. Our prop a erOswegowould to Ha1llike BoulevardeinsTigard. aInsea fact,etoilOur I from Carmen Drive in L knowledge, we would have the only sidewalks in our entire area. It seems that the monies involved tcould ax be better spent o the Citybuyineratmanhoneothatm`ll , would add additional payroll stretch of sidewalk and curb. ;again, we recognize that the ovePulet9osim retthanowillingncil stooimproveethetlice city streets of which we will all be proud. g art of an entire street improve- in conjunction with other property owners or as a p ment project. As an act of good faith we have a signed Non-Remonstrative agrevill,.►lt ready for filing with the County. We certainly do not like the adversary role that this appeal process places us in and wish to cooperate to the full est. We would, however, l i ke the dPl ann i�l9 t}�' �`s' sion to find in our behalf on the current improvement of Bonita an !:notiiledge that the Pion-Remonstrance will be filed inanediately. Yours truly, Derek Hogarth i DH/r t i s Gj O T'�G `po•� 20 _ ♦S Z�� <r. :1 r\taL ..tmhitnh.t,r• Tht.trn,tl nt tern.tl,(IJIsurc,N)\ ir,unt..tn.llrrt t"r .r, r itr.ttC III%L'ntrrrl, I,rrrttnrl "�l.unt.unut.>;.Ir�lt�,urr1 E,r rr{,Ir rr;.;t:1 ur�{a �n�ut f�trrcc�lurc, ,uu1 ntrr.t rd.tll rr rin tir�r:lult yu.tltn, h.+•been .tn:i «tll ,. nt:nu� Ihk �lr,�rr.tl t)Ht crmintttmrnt , „n , u.t,rmrr h L.rtt,c- ru .rrr th nu .t r'II'll lt 1`.Irt IRlr hu,tncs, \. .. . , „nt the ,1,1,,Itntnrt% t.. I ��ntr�•I rc �uu: MI ill, wt imck- eE z s t a CSR r t f • 6 + 2 1 s arRt 0 �• s O i♦i)1 ti1�RIAL • i - a. l r'r r Secondary Processes e -T� Engineering Tooling Puget recognizes the many design and Puget controls all phases of the tooling material considerations in custom-molded process.Having in-house mold design,we products. supply you with detailed blueprints of the We provide professional expertise and mold.This is followed by status reports design assistance on part geometry and raw during the building phase,and complete material selection.We may be able to re- first-article inspection reports when the commend design modifications to make mold is complete. your product stronger or more economical Throughout all stages of the tooling to produce. process we maintain close communication Our skilled engineers obtain the sup- with you.This will allow you to make port of major material suppliers to insure changes,if required, with minimum the reliability of their design application, impact on schedule and cost. vuosT and to stay abreast of new raw material developments.We strive to find new ways to become more cost effective and improve your products,increasing our ability to give you better service. ® * F a�. 7ivo color molding by insert- ing pans into the mold. 7bp:Cooling fixtures can in- Ultra-sonic welding,staking crease productivity for some and inserting. products. Left:Constant inspection to meet customer specifications. 5000 sq.ft.Molding Sho is planned to maximize productivity and cost e#eetiveness. a {� i r� 3•. 3 � E g60, .i-.i...t :.I 1, 1 (.coH Lctcar I)t )rrKcIn 1 Yw t F �l .4' r r_ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ` COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 AGENDA ITEM #: Z' DATE SUBMITTED: September 20, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: Continuation from ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: FEES 6 CHARGES September 17, 1984 meeting REPORT REQUESTED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR: ssasss:asssssssssasass:sas=ssssssssa=sasaazssaaaaaaaa=::seas asp asasassaassa INFORMATION SUMMARY At the September 17 City Council meeting, information on the costs of certain fees and charges was presented. Since most of these fees have recently changed, there was consensus to withhold further action until after November 1. The feeling was that even though the current rates do not recover costs in full, that Council wants to continue this policy, at least until after the election and the future trend of some other revenues is better known. There are other fees the City collects, some of which have not been costed recently. Also, some fees which are highlighted on the attachment and are in the back of the Revenue Manual from September 17, are proposed new fees. Council may wish to consider these before November. sssssaszs assssaa:s:sass:aass=saassza=-s ass szsas sazsss=zs aasassasass:a:ssasssss: ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED sassssassasassssasssasasssassassssss-sssasssassesssassssssssss::seas:seas ssasss SUGGESTED ACTION Whether or not to consider the proposed fees and any other fees which have not been reviewed in detail recently. C FEES AND CHARGES SUMMARY for September 17, 1984 DISCUSSION PURPOSE-11 ONI Y CURRENT FEE TITLE RATE COST COMP. PLAN PROCESSING — Text Only $450. $807 COMP. PLAN PROCESSING — Map Only $650. $807 COMP. PLAN PROCESSING — Text and Map $1000• $807 ZONE CHANGE PROCESSING $350 - 1250 $538 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING — Conceptual $450 $694 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING — Detailed $550 $274 CONDITIONAL USE $300 $570 HOME OCCUPATION $75 $171 HOME OCCUPATION RENEWAL new $20 TEMP. USE PROCESSING — less than, equal 3 mo. $50 $161 TEMP. USE PROCESSING — greater than 3 mo. $175 $196 VARIANCE PROCESSING — Administrative $200 $341 VARIANCE PROCESSING — Subdivision $300 $401 SENSITIVE LANDS PROCESSING — Floodplain $500 $615 SENSITIVE LANDS PROCESSING — Administrative $150 $471 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESSING $75 - $500+ $466 LAND DIV. PROC. — Minor Land Part.-Resid. $150 $341 LAND DIV. PROC. — Minor Land Part.-Non-resid. $300 $341 LAND DIV. PROC. — Major Land Part. see MLP-Subd. $341 LAND DIV. PROC. — Subdiv. Part.-Prel. $250+$5/lot $557 LAND DIV. PROC. — Subdiv. Part.-Final Plat $100+$1/lot $147 APPEAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION no charge $296 APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL $275+ $226+ STREET/LAND DEDICATION $100 $ STREET/LAND VACATION $250+ $250 OVERDUE FINE — Library Materials $.50/item/day $1.00/item/day up to $5.00 up to $10. per notice per notice PHOTOCOPIER — Library $.10 per page MICROFICHE COPIER — Library $.15 per page POLICE REPORT COPIES $5. first 10 $10. first 10 pages or less pages or less $.25/page $.25/page thereafter thereafter POLICE PHOTOGRAPHS COPIES $2.per print $2.50/print FINGERPRINTS $5.per set $10. per set (0584p) C CURRENT FEE TITLE RATE COST BLASTING PERMIT FEE $146 FLEXIBLE SETBACK STANDARDS - DEVELOPED LOTS $245 ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATIONS $847 SIGN CODE EXCEPTIONS $252 ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT $397 HOME OCCUPANCY RENEWAL $20 HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT $519 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT $55 ACCESSORY USES/ACCESSORY STRUCTURES $141 INTERPRETATION OF C.O.C. BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT $66 ZERO LOT LINE SETBACK STANDARDS $276 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $27i RETURNED CHECK FEE $2; L.RECORDING OF DOCUMENTS $55+ (0584p) . s t CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON j COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY '' AGENDA OF: SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 AGENDA ITEM #k: /� DATE SUBMITTED: September 20, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: Ord. No. 54-85 - ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: removed fees from TMC FEES AND CHARGES REPORT REQUESTED BY: i DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR: zssassssssas------asszaaaasaas------=-==sszassaaaria----=rima:------asssxasasxa INFORMATION SUMMARY On September 17, Council passed an Ordinance removing the rates for street and alleys excavating permits for the reason of increasing efficiency. The rates need to be adopted by resolution with the same effective date of November 1. The rates in the attached resolution are the same as those removed from the TMC. s------------------=-----zzasssa------=aaza--------- ALTERNATIVES -----axaALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED sasasssasssasssas:Issas sssasasss sssassss:sss:sa:s ss s::s::sz:a:s ssssa as sxs:seas s SUGGESTED ACTION Adopt the attached resolution, resetting the fees for street and alley excavation permits. t CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: September 24, 1984 AGENDA ITEM #: DATE SUBMITTED: 9-19-84 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Dispatch Contract RFP Draft Discussion REQUESTED BY: City Council DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: y . CITY ADMINISTRATOR: INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached is the Dispatch Contract R.F.P. Draft as per City .Council direction at the June 25, 1984 Council Meeting. (See attached June 25th Council Agenda Item Summary). The R.F.P. Draft identifies all elements of the Dispatching Program, and are required to provide the necessary service delivery to the Tigard citizens and interface with the other existing Support Services program. It also identifies the necessary hardware requirements and indirect cost elements to -LTiplement the dispatching program and legal requirements. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED I will also recommend that in addition to Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District as a service provider, the following agencies be given an opportunity to bid on this proposal. 1. City of Beaverton, Fire District #1, and Washington County. SUGGESTED ACTION Council review and comment to develop the R.F.P. final draft. The final draft is scheduled for Council review in December, and the request for bid in early January, 1985. Res tfully, .BPMamLs Chief of Police CITY OF TI_ GARD, OREGON E COUNCIL. ACEtIDA_I_CEI1 SUMMA RS' June 25, 1984 AGENDA ITEM k : .AGENDA OF: — DATE SUBMITTED: June 20, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Dispatch REQUESTED BY: Chief Of Police Contracting Study - Update Information I CITY ADMINISTRATOR- DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: - S.' IINFOR14ATION SUMMARY The police department e dispatching is continuing to gataecominformation rehensive RPgpuestcfor Proposal contracts to aid us in the development of P for City Council consideration. have the least• will impactaonervi esoceidentify an integration delivery quality to the system or process citizens of Tigard. This will require a critical analysis of contracting dispatch services and our existing program; what the trade-offs will be and the imp methods to overcome trade-offs, and the cost relationship dbetween the quantity two options . Considerations should focus . cost as well as quality y should be able to select the best option. provided. With a good R.F.P. the Cit ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1: Is cost the only consideration?- 2: Is effectivenss' and efficiency the only consideration? f fil and- #2 above; if so, how should the two options 3. Or a combination o be weighted? { SUGGESTED ACTION Due to the time required to develop the R.F.P. , I will propose the following schedule• id- for your consideration. City Council review RandP. draft in lates in August to1985• September. Final draft approval in December, Please advise of what direction to proceed. Respectfully, REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL 1 The City of Tigard is requesting written proposals for a complete range of Police Dispatching Services Contract consistent with the police department's dispatching program. NOTE: This agreement shall be for a three to five year time period, beginning July 1, 1985 subject to termination by either party upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to the other. The following listed items are identified as critical and essential to the Tigard Police Department Support Services Division's services delivery program, and therefore, are required provisions of this Agreement. It is the intent of the City of Tigard to maintain a professional citizen service delivery program within the Tigard community. unity. Should you have any questions regarding this proposal, direct your inquiries to Support Services Manager Alice Carrick, Tigard Police Department, 639-6168. C A. 1. Dispatch Personnel Requirements: Dispatch personnel providing dispatch servic are required to have considerable knowledge of the city, to includ, �isiness and prominent building locations, street locations, including the street numbering system to aid in police dispatching and providing assistance to citizen's requests. 2. Dispatch personnel providing dispatching services employed by the vendor will be subject to background investigations by the Tigard Police Department, due to the nature of confidential and sensitive information. They will also be required to sign a confidentiality and security agreement. 3. Dispatch personnel employed by the vendor must have a comprehensive knowledge of the State of Oregon Law Enforcement Data System (LEDs), its policies and procedures, and the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) system, and its policies and procedures. 4. Dispatch personnel employed by the vendor must have a working knowledge of. the Tigard Municipal Codes and State Law relative to traffic and criminal law. 5'. Dispatch personnel employed by the vendor will be required to dispatch police personnel consistent with Tigard Police Department policy and dispatch codes. (. The vendor and all persons employed by the vendor shall meet all requirements set forth by LEDs policies and procedures, (per LEDS Manage- meet Control Agreement). B. Transition Requirements: INTERGOVERNMENTAL CJOPERATYON ORS 190 190.003 Definitions for ORS 190.003 to 190.710. As used in ORS 190.003 to 190.110, "unit of local government" includes a county, city, district or public corporation, commission, authority or entity organized and existing under statute or city or county character. (1967 c.550 s.2) 190.007 Policy; construction. In the interest of furthering economy and efficiency in local government, intergovernmental cooperation is declared a matter of state-wide concern. The provisions of ORS 190.003 to 190.110 shall be liberally construed. (1967 c.550 s.3) 190.010 Authority of local governments to make intergovernmental agreement. A unit of local government may enter into a written agreement with any other unit- or units of local government for the performance of any or all fimctions and activities that a party to the agreement, its officers or agencies, have authority to perform. The agreement may provide for the performance of a function or activity: (1) By a consolidated department; (2) By jointly providing for administrative officers: (3) By means of facilities or equipment jointly constructed, awned, leased or operated; (4) By one of the parties for any other party, or (5) By a combination of the methods described in this section. (Amended by 1953 c.161 s.2; 1963 c.189 s.l; 1967 c.550 s.4) 190.020 Contents of agreement. (1) An agreement under ORP Lill 010 shall specify the functions or activities to be performed and b�� 4,i,it means they shall be performe-d. Where applicable, the agreement shall provide for: t t t t (a) The apportionment among the parties to the agreement of the responsibility for providing funds to pay for expenses incurred in the performance of the functions or activities. (b) The apportionment of fees or other revenue derived from the functions or activities and the manner in which such revenue shall be accounted for. (c) The transfer of personnel and the preservation of their e;nployment benefits. (d) The transfer of possession of or title to real or personal property. (e) The term or duration of the agreement, which may be perpetual. (f) The rights of the parties to terminate the agreement. (2) When the parties to an agreement are unable, upon termination of the agreement, to agree on the transfer of personnel or the division of assets and liabilities between the parties, the circuit court had jurisdiction to determine that transfer or division. (Amended by 1967 c.550 s.5) 190.030 Effect of agreement. (1) When an agreement under ORS 190.010 has been entered into, the unit of local government, consolidated department or administrative officer designated therein to perform specified functions or activities is vested with all powers, rights and duties relating to those functions and activities that are vested by law in each separate party to the agreement, its officers and agencies. (2) An officer design-tea in an agreement to perform specified duties, functions or activities of two or more public officers shall be considered to be holding only one office. (3) An elective office may not be terminated by an agree,-nent under ORS 190.010. (Amended by 1967 c.550 s.6) 190.040. (Amended by 1953 c.182 s.2; 1957 c.428 s.l; repealed by 1963 c.189 s.3) 190.110 Authority of units of local government and state agencies to cooperate. In performing a duty imposed upon it or in exercising a power conferred upon it, a unit of local government or a state agency of this state may cooperate, by agreement or otherwise, with a unit of local government or a state agency of this or another state, or with the United States, or with a United States governmental agency. This power includes power to provide jointly for administrative officers. (Amended by 1963 c.189 s.2; 1967 c.550 s.7) 190.120 (1955 c.164s.1; 1959 c.662 s.3; 1961 c.108 s.8; renumbered 297.910) TRANSFER OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ORS 236 236.610 Rights of employe when duties assumed by different public employer. (1) No public employe shall be deprived of his employment solely because the duties of his employment have been assumed or acquired by another public employer_, whether or not an agreement, annexation or consolidation with his present employer is involved. Notwithstanding any statute, charter, ordinance or resolution, but subject to ORS 236.610 to 236.650, the public employe shall be transferred to the cloyment of the public employer who assumed or acquired his duties, without further civil service examination. (2) As used in subsection (1) of this section, "public employe" means an employe whose salary or wages is paid from public funds and "public C employer" includes an Oregon nonprofit corporation that has . ;cepted, by C agreement, the transfer of a public facility from a political subdivision of this state for maintenance and operation. (3) In transferring a public employe under subsection (1) of this section, his employer shall furnish the employment records of that employe to the transferee employer at the time of transfer. The time of transfer shall be by written agreement between the public employers involved. (1963 c.204 ss.l, 2; 1971 c.500 s.l) 236.620 status of transferred employe. A public employer who receives a transferred employe under ORS 236.610 (1), including an employe whose transfer is provided for by an agreement under ORS 190.010, shall place that employe on its employe roster, subject to the following: (1) If the employe was serving a probationary period with his employer at the time of transfer, his past service on probation shall apply on the regular probation requirements of the transferee employer. (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law applicable to a retirement system for employes of the prior employer or of the transferee employer, the employe at his option may elect to continue under any retirement system in which he was participating prior to his transfer or, if he meets the qualifications therefor, he may elect to participate in the retirement system available to employes of the transferee erployer. The enploye's election shall be in writing and made within 30 days after the date of his transfer. If the employe elects to continue under the retirement system in which he was participating prior to his transfer, he shall retain all rights and be entitled to all benefits under that system, he shall continue to make contributions to that system and the transferee employer shall make contributions on his behalf to that system as required of employers participating in that system, as if the transfer had not occurred. (3) The employe shall retain the seniority he accrued under his prior employment, but no regular employe of the transferee employer shall be demoted or laid off by reason of that seniority. (4) The employe otherwise shall enjoy the same privileges and be subject to the same regulations as other employes of the transferee employer. (1963 c.204 s.3; 1967 c.550 s.10) C i C. Direct Dispatching Requirements: 1. Dispatching Duties Talk Time Minimum Hours Required: 3,253 hours annuall 2. Administrative phone Call Routing Management Talk Time (dispatching information, aid to citizens/other agencies) 821 hours annually Minimum Hours Required: -- 3. Teletype Operation and Message Relay to Tigard police Department 1,274 hours annually Minimum Hours Required - 4. C u plaint Log Typing, Updated and Delivered to Tigard Police Department at 6:30 a.m., 2:30 p.m. , and 10:30 p.m. daily (shift t. briefing) Minimum Hours Required: 723 hours annually + Travel Time for vendor 5. Aid to Citizens/Agencies (walk-in traffic/after hours) via phone relay Minimum Hours Required: 146 hours annually 6. Warrant File Managment (requires 10 minute response on inquiri_es/NCIC Standard Policy) Minimum Hours Required: 30 hours annually 7. Response Time Analysis Reporting Monthly Minimum Hours Required: 36 hours annually B. Audio/Visual Monitoring Prisoner Holding Area Minimum Hours Required: 748 hours annually 9. Staffing Requirements at Tigard Police Department Building when Prisoners are in Holding Area Minimum Hours Required: 748 hours annually 10. Hourly Prisoner Holding Area Inspections when Prisoners are in Holding Area Minimum Hours Required: 125 hours annually 11. Business Emergency Notificiation Manaqement Syste.,1 (Alarms, animal problerio, building checks, hazards, wires down, towed autos) Minimum Hours Required: 42 hours annually 12. Special Intervention Resource Information Management System (Children's Services Division, Washington County Juvenile Department, { Salvation Army Vouchers, etc. ) Minimum Hours Required / After Hours Only 12 hours annually D. Indirect Dispatching Requirements: 1. Ccnumication System Hardware (Lease/Purchase). See Specifications Attached 2. Dispatching Materials and Supplies (Dispatch Time Clock, Dispatch Cards, Teletype Paper, Recorder Tapes) 3. Warrant File Management System (Requires Limited Access Security) 4. Long Distance Phone Call Charges Estimated Yearly Cost: $9,900 5. Phone System to Administer Phone Call Routing Between the Dispatch Center to Tigard Police Department 6. Dedicated Phone Line at Police Department to Dispatch Center (After Hours Phone) 7. Electronic Security Door Control Management System (at Dispatch Center)--Sally Port, Prisoner Booking/2, gnployee Entrance/2 8. Prisoner Holding Facility Monitoring System at Dispatch Center 9. Teletype Lease and Interface with Police Department system to Include a Slaved Printer at Police Department 10. Base Radio and Related Electronic Equipment Maintenance (F)CC Licensed or Certified or Equivalent Technician) 11. Dedicated Phone Line Leases frau the City of Tigard to Dispatch Center Four (4) Required / 1:5000 Population 12. Civic Center Fire and Burglary Alarm System 13. Special Intervention Resource Information System Files, Etc., Interpreters) (Children Services Division, Juvenile Department, C i 14. Local Master File (Alpha File) Management System (requires limited access security) NOTE: Requires duplication of existing master card file 112 master cards per inch of files x 784 inches of files = 87,808 master cards to be duplicated i I 1. 0 GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS-CONSOLE INTENTION It is the intention of these specifications to set forth the minimum requirements for the performance of a Communications Control Center Console. 1. 2 STANDARDS The Communications Control Center Console equipment specifically stated herein shall meet or exceed both EIA and FCC requirements which are current at the time of the award of the installation. In all details not specifically stated herein, it is understood that the equipment shall meet all telephone company specificat- ions regarding specific audio levels and DC voltace on the line. 1. 3 DESCRIPTION The Communications Control Center Console shall provide all the necessary functions to operate FM tvio-way radio base stations. 1. 4 OPERATOR' S MANUAL One operator' s manual shall be fi.Irnished with each console. This manual shall provide a base operational description of the equioment, a glossary of terms, and otnor pertinent Operational details. The manual shall include pictures sh=wir�q the locati��r� of various operator devices. This iL. -n is in addition to the Service Manual. 1. 5 INSTALLATION MANUAL The installation manual shall consist of a printed section that describes the mechanical detai is of the console's assembly. I:.; shall also include those details that are unique to the syste:11, such as digital address of each module in the central electronic=, package and the termination of each audio pair and auxiliary input/output function presented to the central electronics package. 1. 6 SERVICE MANUAL A brief description of each module, including a theory of operation section, a schematic_ diagram. and beard overlay shah. be provided. City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - 1. 7 REPLACEMENT PARTS The bidder shall maintain a Replacement Parts Department to furnish replacement parts and service for- the equipment. An ample stock of individual components and equivalent unit replacements shall be carried for as long a period as demand warrents. This period shall extend beyond the norma- 1 life expectancy of the equipment : not less than ten yea--.- In addition, the bidder shall state the location of the nearest manufacturer approved parts replacement depot and the availability of a manufacturer approved unit repair and return facility. 1. 8 MANUFACTURER' S MAINTENANCE SERVICE The bidder shall offer a cornDlete contract maintenance service agreement through a manufacturer approved local service shop. Such service shall include: 1) A board repair service through a rnanufacturer approved service shop. 2) Periodic checks on perfor-rnance as re- quired by FCC Rules and ReglAlat inns. 2) Dualifications of Service Facility: As a required resj3orise by bidders the followir:c information is to be supplied concerning ins- tallation and maintenance subcontractors: A) Name & Location of Service Shoo B) point of contact with 2 4hr-. phone riUmber (s) C) minimurn response tune - 24hrs a day basis D) Time in the industry and number rnf service t facilities. E) Technical qualifications and scooe of engineering support for service facility. F) Scope and number of like projects G) Supply a copy of existing contract between service facility and grime bidder. z The installation ana on-going maintenance of the system is of prime importance. The ability of the vendor' s service and maintenance subcontractor to meet the Department' s standards, , # will be a prune consideration in the award of the contract. It is the Department' s desire to have a single point of contact fOr' all service related concerns or questions. Bidders must certify that service facilities maintain an inventory of spare parts. it is further required that there be a back uo service facility which could respond to a system failure within a one ( 1) hour driving time. These service facilities are to be identified in the bidders response as a required document. City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - 1. 9 FACTORY TESTING f Every console shall undergo extensive factory tes•- ing prior to shipment. This testing shall encompass all phases of the console? equipment from the board level to the system level. All consoles shall be functionally tested as a system. 1. 10 PROPOSAL PACKAGE In order to demonstrate total system knowledge and renuirements, The bidder shall submit a proposal package. This package shall consist of an aerial view of the room layout, a drawing of the console panel placements, and a photograph of each unique console. This Dhotograph may consist of -itheran actual console or scaled models. 1. 12 MAINTENANCE/WARRANTY The bidder shall provide one (1) year of maintenance for all system components after system installation and acceptance. Maintenance shall cover all parts, labor and travel time. Time of included maintenance shall be normal business hours, seven days it week.. Bidders are also to provide the Department with extended warranty information covering 24 hours a day set-vice. The Department acknowledges that acts of God need not be covered under the maintenance conditions of this call. 1. 13 SINGLE SOURCE CONTACT It is required that bidders suDDly the name and phone number(s) of a simple individual within the service and sales oreanizatiorr to whom the DeDartment can address concerns, CUL'Stions, or re- auired actions for all the equipment supplied. This information will be offered the DeDartment as a Single Source contact who is responsible and responsive to the needs of the Departrn-.ent for all the equiDment supplied. This requirement shall remain in effect for the life of the system and will be considered a Drime consideration in the award of a contract. City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - 1. 14 QUALIFICATIONS OF BIDDERS So that the Department can evaluate the qualifications of the responding bidders the following information is required to assist the Department in their evaluation. In the case of bidsi> being submitted by Manufacturers Representatives or Consultants, formal documentation roust be supplied to the Department that the representative or consultant is able to act in behalf and bind the original egUiDrnent manufacturer should Droblems, claims, or- concerns arise. Reference Section 1. 12. This condition to cover primary cornoonents of the system. For console equiornent please provide: 1. Time in industry 2. Scope and number of like projects (list at least three) , with name and phone number of contact person. 3, Engineering experience or support-be sD�cific 4, Local "Single Source" contact, Ref: Section 1. 12 1. 15 TERMS OF PAYMENT Bidders are requested to DroDose terms of payrnent to the Denart- t ment covering the following: r 1. Eau prnent 2. Installation 3, System Acceotance It is further requested that bidders Drr_.vide the Devartrnent with two (2) , three (3) and five (5) year ADDroved Government Lease Terms. 1. 16 SHIPPING CHARGES Shipping charges are to be submitted with Rid Response. If the shipoino charges for the equipment pur^chased are to be paid by the Department, these charges are to be stated in the Cost Resoonse Sheets. In no case will the Department cover (pay far) shipping charges which are not covered within the response section. ns Console City of Tigard - Police Communicatio - 2. 0 GENERAL SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS It is the desire of the Deoartment to purchase a communication system that will meet the following requirements: 1. The control of existing base stations and related functions through the purchase of a dispatch communications console. " Tied in with the control of radio communications will be (1) paging (2) door control (3) telephone communications. The requested console has beer, specified in such a manner as to rneet Dresent communications needs as well as room for futurE growth needs. Tied in with these future growth needs is the capability to be in a position whereby parallel dispatch with other Public Safety Agencies is possible. 2. The tie-in with the Tualatin Fire District' s existing microwave system. The requirements of this call is the equipment necessary to interconnect with the Fire District' s microwave system (through their Tigard Station) and the eauipmer,t necessary for the establishment of ea receiver voting system. Receivers to be located at Tualatin Fire District' s sites at King City and Portland Community College. SPECIAL_NOTE: Information concerning the Receiver Voting System can be found in Bid Section $. 0. Information dealing with Console specifications can be found starting with Bid Section 2. 1. 2. 1 CONSOLE DESIGN The console shall be designed to enhance the disoatcher' s capabilities in aerformino their resource maria cemer:t ,fob and minimize the effort and concentration reouired for- radio control. Each radio channel shall have its own, permanently located control module. Each function on each control module shall have its own color-coded switch and associated I-ED indicator. Sinrller keystroke operations shall be reauired to activate the controlling functions. City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - 2. 2 ELECTRICAL FEATURES 2. 2. 1 SOLID STATE CIRCUITRY The electrical circuitry employed throughout the console shall utilize solid state circuitry and be micro-processor based. The only exception allowed shall be relays, transformers and switches. 2. 2. 2 EQUIPMENT INTERCHANGEABILITY For ease of service, all similar boards shall be completely interchangeable with minor modifications. These minor modifications shall consist of a plug-in personality FROM and/ or switch settings. 2. 2. 3 STANDARD FEATURE EXPANSION Expansion of system after installation shall be accomvlished by a single PROM exchange and the addition of the required panel switches to control the added. 2. 3 MECHANICAL FEATURES 2. 3. 1 MODULAR PLUG-IN DESIGN All modules shall be of plug-ir, modular circuit beard construction. The plating material at the circuit board edge where plug-in contact is rnade shall be gold over nickel over capper to provide maximum reliability. All copper traces or, the circuit board shall be covered with a protective insulating material. 2. 3. 2 MOUNTING REQUIREMENTS All of the modules in the central electronics package and console shall be contained in EIA panel-mounted module housings. Each central electronics Dackaee module housing shall accent at least eight base stations arid/or dual receiver interface modules. 2. 3. 3 FRONT ACCESS Due to space requirements a 1 1 controls, test points, adjustments and operations circuits in a dispatch position should be accessible from the front of the console. City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - TERMINATIONS INFORMATION The vendor shall supply information detailing precisely where each audio signal and irsput/output function is terminated or, the central electronics connectors. This information shall also include. the factory-assigned digital address for each of the modules in the central electronics package. 3. 0 SYSTEM CONCEPT The Communication Control Console System architecture shall consist of two (2) main components: A. A central Electronics Package B. Operator consoles which are to share this central electronics package 3. 1 GENERAL ELECTRONICS PACKAGE The central electronics package shall contain the base statiori interface modules that are required to control the stations as specified. It shall also contain the reouired phone patch interfaces, operator interfaces, system timers, power suoplies, and any auxiliary input and/or outDLtt interfaces as required. 3. 1. 1 LOCATION The central electronics package shall be capable of being remote- ly located at least two-hundred (200) feet away fror,l the actual control console location. 3. 1. 2 AUDIO SIGNAL PROCESSING Each audio signal presented to the central electronics oackaCF? shall be digitized. The digitized representation shall be multiplexed, using Time Division Multiplexing techniques. To prevent the possibility of crosstalk, no more than three (3) digitized signals shall be routed simultaneously- After routiral the digital signals will then be converted back to an audio f sianal. 3. 1. 3 BASE STATION INTERFACE MODULES Each Base station interface module shall incorporate the circuit- ry reauired to operate a remotely base station. Each mocule shall consist of a olug-in printed circuit beard that contair:s a microprocessor and its related circuits, an ALC circuit. line driver amplifier, both 2 and 4 wire line termination , transformers and fault detection circuits. The modf_Ile shall bF-� capable of controlling a tone controlled station. B th DC and E&M relay board additions shall be available it reg uisystem design. City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - Solid state circuitry shall be emoloyed all switches, control and amplification. For easy reference all active devir_e�: ( shall have designations and lead function screened into oathiliary circuit board at the device location. All P circuit output connections shall also be screened onto the board for easy reference. The receiver section of the module shall contain a second line transformer. Audio signals in either transformer shall be connected to an ALC amplifier. Level control automatically adjust the amplifier gain over a wide range of inputs to assure r constant output. The gain shall not increase during a pause in speech, but rather, be held in memory until a new input is received. The output ALC shall be digitized and placed into a switch selectable time slot one one of the MUX busses under the control of the microprocessor. A mixer amplifier shall be provided to combine the audio signals from both line transformers. Continuous control control tones shall not be present. The isolation between the two transformer' s I • uits shall be preserved. The mixer' s output shall be availd-le for a logging recorder and similar aoplica- t ions. Undefined I/O functions shall remain available for future use. If defined as an O"tput function, a relay shall be provided to switch the actual Load. Failure detection circuits shall be included in each module. These circuits shall include a power-UD check r'f the micro- processor, RAM, ROM, and timer circuits. Power for the mod and shall be derived from the central power supply through rJ voltage regulators. 3. 1. 4 SPECIFICATIONS TRANSMIT +1ldPm into 600 Ohms Audio Output 2% from 300 to 3200Hz Distrotion Frequency Response +1, -3dB, 300 to 3200 F?z , 1000Hz (except for notch) Hum and Noise 50dB below 0 dBm linE4 out out Termination Impedance 600, 9t[70 or 12K ohm bridging, balanced DC Control Currents Current regulated: both pos. and neg. currents of 5. 5mA, resistance is 10 Ohms City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - RECEIVE -25 dBrn or -40 ALC Sensitivity dBrn, select-able? A 35 dB input increase ALC Range above the ALC sensitivity point will cause no more than a 3dB output variation output variation 600 ohm or 1EK bridge/bal. Input Impedance Common-Made Rejection 60 dB from 50 to 3200 Hz +1, -3 db, 300 to 3200 Hz Frequency Response ref: 1000 Hz (except notch) 60 dB below 1-1/4 watts Hurn and Noise speaker output 2% from 300 to 3200 Hz. Distrotion 3. 1. 5 TONE CONTROL The tone remote control system shall be operable over two-wire source in the central electronics package and shale uniform in l b frequency and phase throughout the console system. The second on tone (function tone) shall be generated by the interface module in response to the involved base station instructions over the data bus. In compliance with FCC regulations, if control circuit facilities should be last, -the system shall be designed such that the base station transmitter ceases transmitting within 500 ms. SPECIFICATIONS exceed the following specifications The tone system shall meet or Control Tone Frequencies 600 to 2350 Hz. 250 ms. Tone Duration 16 available tones Function CADability Control Line Frequency Offset +/-10 Hz. Max. Control Line Insertion Loss 20 d3 City of Tigard - police Communications Console - dB from Control Line Response 500 to 2500 F1z. ( When energy is present or, Control Line Energy the control line from 500 to 2500 Hz. , at no tit-le will the energy from 2250 to 2750 Hz. exceed that eneraY found in the 500 to 2250 Hz. range- System Operating Time Less than 250 ms. System Release Time stations than 150 ms for CSO stations & 250 ms for CTCSS Stations- 3. 1. 6 tations.3. 1. 6 SYSTEM TIMER MODULE Two system timer modules shall be provided in the central package to supervise other rnod�_rles communicating electronics with each other. Each system timer module sha�ridscrontroieously, and identically , generate the required timing signals, although only one module will be "or, line" at any giver time. The two modules shall autr_.rnatically alternate being "on- line" to pre -ent a failed module from being undetected. Solid state circuitry shall abe eraDctive deviceshrouglr1have Or, ihratians printed circuit i board, and lead functions screened �-�rit_� the circuit board at the device location. All optional dumper connections and auxiliar'Y circuit also be screened onto the board for easy output connections shall reference. 3. 1. 7 OPERATOR INTERFACE MODULE Each console shall communicate to, and be supervised by, its own interface module in the central electronics package. The Operator Interface Module shall contain the personality of the a microprocessor PROM. This PROM shall be uniquely console in programmed with the function identity of every active switch in the console. 3. 1.9 PHONE PATCH INTERFACE MODULE The phone patch interface module shall incorporate the circuitry reauired to connect a public switched telephone line to the control center. The module will allow a telephone caller to carry on a conversation directly with a two-way radio user. A "first come, first serve" priority shall be provided, resulting in simplex operation. l City of Tigard - Police Communications Console The module shall be identical in every way toa base station interface module. The tone or DC control capability of the module shall not be utilized in this application. 3. 1. 10 POWER SUPPLY A continuous duty power supply shall be provided for furnishing regulated low voltage to the central electronics package. The power supply shall be completely solid state. Two identical regulator circuits sharing a single mains transformer for each of the two voltages shall be provided. Either regulator shall be capable of powering its portion of thc- central electronics package. Short circuit current limiting shall be provided on each regulator circuit to protect the regulator, circuits from accidental shorts and thereby prevent nuisance fuse blowing. Each regulator circuit shall include a failure indicator and shall be capable of signaling the central electronics package when a failure does occur. A rechargeable gel-cell battery shall be provided that will preserve the contents of all memory elements for at least five- (5) ive(5) minutes, should the main power to the console fail. 3. 2 CONSOLE-GENERAL 3. 2. 1 OPERATOR POSITIONS The operator console in the system shall use the rine central electronics package. The console shall contain switches and indicators. The switches shall instruct the central electronics bank to perform a specific task. The indicators at the console shall signal the existence of events as specified by the central electronics package. Console shall be capable of remote operation. Future remote operators shall be capable of being connected to the system through not more than three microwave channel cr five phone lines. Remote operators shall be able to be located anywhere in the County as long as the above requirements are met. They shall be provided with full console operations and full parallel status. City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - 3. 2. 2 CONSOLE/CENTRAL ELECTRONICS INTERFACE Each dispatcher shall be connected to the central electronics package by a sinole cable assembly of not more than a ten pair plug-in cable. Two spare audio pairs shall be provided for monitor speakers. 3. 2. 3 MULTIPLE BAY OPERATOR POSITIONS Future multiple operator positions shall be possible. This future expansion must be capable through the use of plug-in cabelino. Hand wiring shall not be accepted to electronically connect future bays. 3. 2. 4 MASTER CONTROL PANEL A Master Control Panel (MCP) shall be located within the console and shall contain the functions and controls that apply to all the channels being controlled. Individual switches/buttons and indicators for each function, properly labeled, shall be provided. Indicators with common row and/or column labels shall not be accepted; nor shall a switch arrangement that requires multiple keystokes to obtain commonly used functions be acceptable. The MCP in the system shall be in direct communica- tion with its Operator Interface Module in the Central Electronics Package through riot more than three twisted wire pairs. The following switches/buttons, indicators, items and functions, explained as necessary, shall be provided at the operator (Dispatcher) position in its Master Control Panel : 1. Power Supply: A power supply for the console electronics shall be provided. The power supply shall be similar- to the supply used with the Central Electronics Package. 2. Speaker/Amplifiers: Speaker/amplificers shall be provided. One selected audio and one un-selected audio. Each amplifier shall contain a quardtone filter and a volume control. It shall not be possible to reduce the audio level of the volume below an audible range. 3. Time Display: A six diqit time display (hours: minutes: seconds) shall be provided.. The display shall be synchronized to the time Cgenerator in the Central Electronics Package. City of Tigard - Police Communications Console lay: A LED bar-type VU meter display . 4- VU Disp shall shall be provided. The VU display employ red LED' s and shall resPOrldto eceivecro- phone audio and selected channel audio. n Keypad Sixteen (16) button Touch Tome ty-eased 'fcT' S- be provided. It shall be shall setting the time, Perforrnir�g selective call or selective intercom functions- Transmit Button: A red Trakthe selected key selected on shall 6' be provided which will key transmitter. A Monitor button shall be 7. Monitor Button: r provided to disable the coded squelch (CTCS in the selected base station receiver. This button shall Permit the operator to r"before selected channel receiver(s) transrnitt irng- Paging Encoder: Needed for future growth h pag g- (ruin. ) Paging encoder plans. A 1000call nd accessed through the shall be provides a e key pad- The provided MCF Touch Tome tso to meet I agir►q format shall be flexable,r. future reauirernents s 9- This function shall Priority Charnel Marker: a on Provide a tone burst to beten (1a)tseconds. selected channel (s) every : Two (2) Alert Tones shall be Alert Tones 10. (: a steady tome and (2) a 2 H`. provided: rate alterr,atino alert tone- 11. Indicators and Multi-Select Buttons, P' -Select (�) separate Functions. and Mu I t iMemory: The MC shall be capable It at least tw�� and distinct Multi-Select functions- This function shall permit the operator to lect at least two or more simultaneously se • smission or bea6able O ccfhe channels for tran selected cornbination(s) must being held in memory for quick recall by pressirro the associated Multi-Select Button. r shall i if a A memory indicatoMe y. Whend Mem ated usind combination is stored hall not be in Multi-Select Memory the operator s cc�nfinuration required to re-set the Select of the console- Upon cornoletion of the Multi-Select function, Lhe console shall revert to its previous state- . ' {' - Police Communications Cons City of Tigard ole - 12. All Mute Button: An All mute butt -el, indicator and timer shall be provided. This function shall route all console audio after the button is pressed. The audio shall be automatically restored to previous set levelS after thirty seconds or when the button is pressed a second time. 13. Patch Buttons and Functions: Patch buttons shall be provided in the MCP to perform radio patch functions. This shall permit patch control of two or more selected channels. Patch functions mi.rst have the capability of being stored in mernory for- later recall. 14. Patch Transmit Button: This button, when pressed will allow the operator to participate in the radio patch. 15. Door Open Button(s) : Buttons for the control. of two (2) remote door latches with "Open Door" indicator LEDS shall be provided. Vendor to provide the switch, indicator and input buffer controls. 3. 2. 5 CHANNEL CONTROL PANEL The Channel Control Panel shall be located within the console and shall contain modules with the functions and controls associated with individual base stations, phone patch systern, etc. Individual switches and indicators for each function, properly labeled, shall be provided. Indicators or switches with commori row and/car column labels will not be accepted ; nor shall a switch arranaement that reauires multiple keystrokes to obtain commonly used functions will riot be accepted. A sufficient ouantity of Channel Control Panels shall be supplied to contain the channel control modules needed to control and operate the reauired stations. Growth within the console should be provided for; vendors are to state the number of additional channel controls capable within the console. 3. 2. 5. 1 CHANNEL CONTROL MODULE • Each base station within the system must be provided with a channel control module(s) to control such functions as are required. In addition, each module shall contain specific switches and indicators reouired to control such other function�> as are required, i. e. phone patch, freq uericy selection, etc. 1. Call : Intelligent Call indicators shall be used to minimize the flashing lights presented to the Operator. The Call Indicator• shall provide a flashing (LED) indi=ation during an inbound call on channels which City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - have been selected at the operator' s position. A steady (LED) indication shall be provided during a call i" if the channel is unsellected. 2. Select : A select Fhutton and indicator shall be provided on each base station control module. Pressing the button will route receive audio to the Selected Speaker in the MCP and will route microphone audio and PTT signals to the corresponding selected base station interface module in the Central Electronics Package. Pressing a select button on any other channel control module shall deselect all other channel control modules at the operator' s position. 3. Transmit : A single keystroke instant Transmit buttort and indicator shall be provided on each base station control module. By pressing the button, the operator- may transmit on the channel without having to select the channel. If already keyed on one channel, it shall be possible to transmit on any channel by simply pressing the appropriate instant transmit button. The first channel shall be rekeyed, if still in a transmit condition, when the Transmit button on the different instant transmit channel is released. It shall not be necessary to press several buttons to activate this function. 4. Busy: A busy indicator shall be provided on each base station channel control module. The indicator shall illuminate whenever any future console or parallel- connected controller is transmitting on the channel. 5. Patch: A patch button and indicator shall be included on each base station control module, and shall work ire conjunction with the Patch buttons and functions ire the MCP. A base station need only participate in one patch at a time. Patch Busy _indicators in the roodule(s) shall illuminate in all future parallel consoles to indicate that the channel has beer, placed into a patch configuration. C City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - 6. Frequency Selection: As required by the base station, frequency control buttons shall be provided. For two a dual indicator labeled Fl-F2 and frequency stations, a sinqle (toggled/operation) button shall be provided. Four frequency stations shall be provided with four indicators labeled F1, F29 F3 and F4, and two button. that step-up or step-down to select the needed frequency. All multiple frequency modules shall send the frequency control information to the base station and to furure parallel consoles within one second following the change unless the station is keyed. 7. Private Line (CTCSS) : Buttons to control multiple Private Line (CTCSS) encoder with up to four tones r shall be provided in one module. The buttons on the E module shall control the CTCSS encoder in a single base l station. The buttons shall up-date the associated indicators on parallel consoles, and any operator shall be able to initiate a change in selected tones. 8. Volume Control : Each channel control module shall have its own independent volume and pre-set audio level button. The audio from the module shall be controlled from either the volume control or by the pre-set leve]. button. 9. Mute Second Receiver: Where required there shall be a i mute second receiver function switch. This shall provide the capability of muting a second receiver in a two receiver base station. 3.2. 5. 2 AUXILIARY MODULES 1. Phone Patch Control Module: One phone patch control module shall be provided The module shall contain all of the controls normally needed for a patch, plus switches that permit the console operator to force the patch in either- direction should there be noisy phone lines or radio links. The module shall be the same size as a single base station control module and shall be located in the the Channel Control Panel. 2. Instant Play-Back Recorder control Module: An instant Play-Back Recorder Control Module shall be provided. The module shall be the same size as one base station control module and shall be mounted in the channel control panel. The operator shall be able to control the Play-Back Recorder at the console position. city of Tigard - Police Communications Console - 3. 2. 6 PAGING AND SIGNALING The system should contain two types of built-in paging functions incorporated within a 1000 call (min. ) paging encoder. Note: This paging encoder shall be part of the console and riot an "after market", added on encoder. The encoder should be capablE:.� of the following: (1) User selectable paging and (2) Pre- Programmed page selection. 1. User Selectable Paging Requirements: A. Selection of either Motorola Quick Call II or Plectror•, paging formats. B. Operator (manual) entry of in or group pacing C. Operator selection of needed base station and frequency F available within the system. D. Visual indication of the selected pave. 2. Single Hutton Memory Paging Requirements: 1 shall allow the operator to use a single This function h ! button to automatically page are individual on the correct channel and frequency with the correct paoinq format and paging codes. Each button shall be labeled with a custorn label to indicate who or what is beine paged. A minimum of seven (7) such buttons shall be provided and shall be part of the console, mounted in a channel control panel. Sequential pagino shall be passible. The operator shall be ab1P to chain uo to at least seventen (7) Single Button Paging buttons. When the Page Transmit button �. is pressed, the console must automatically send out the series of ore-programmed pages panes on the correct channel and frequency in the order that they were selected. The radio channels shall be held open for- transmission on all the selected stations. 3. 2. 7 CONSOLE HARDWARE FEATURES 1. Footswitch: A footswitch shall be provided. The switch must be capable of Transmit and monitor operation on the selected channel. C City of fiiedi=g = peli-E@ @@fflmanications Console - 2. Headset : A headset and headset jack assembly shall be provided. The headset shall allow the operator to hear- a selected telephone line and respond via a microphone in the headset. A volume control that effects only the volume of the headset shall also be provided on the jack assembly. The headset assembly shall also be capable of transmitting through the headset microphone on a selected radio channel. A switch shall be provided for this toggle operation. When transmitting through the headset microphone on a selected radio channel, no transmission shall go out on the telephone line/panel. No selected or un-selected audio from the radio channels shall be heard through the headset. 3. 2. 9 REQUIRED SYSTEM OPTIONS The following are required system options and are to be addressed in the Cost Response section of this bid. NOTE: Prices for these options are to be quoted in single unit quantities. The Depart- ment may, at its option, order any of the following features without any implied or expressed obligation. The following opt iarts must be capable of being incorporated directly into the console controls, i. e. not hung on the console: A. Audible Alarm button with alarm and reset LED' s B. Self Repeat (repeat thru console) C. Switched output (relay) with and without on/off LED indicators. D. External input indicator(s) LED' s E. Card Cage necessary to expand console operator functions. F. Base Station channel control modules (future) G. Base Station control modules. H. Time/Date Stamp. Simplex, IMB Card Type I. External Public Address function. Department will. supply the needed amplifier. J. Instant "Play-Back", Dictaphone or ecual recorder- K. Logging Recorder capable of recording a rain. of four (4) radio charnels and two (2) telephone lines. Unit to be a dual transport type of unit. C City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - M. Console mounted card slots (19" wide) which will. hold either 24 or 32 cards. Price to be quoted with and without LED status indicators M. Console Operator chair, five leg pedestal type O. Console Mounted pencil drawer (s) 4.0 REDUNDANCY The console system shall incorporate distributed, independent, multi-processors to provide multiple level of redundancy. Thca microprocessor associated with each dispatcher shall be fully capable of independent operation. In the event that one or mora of these units fails, the remaining processors shall still be capable of carrying on console operations. The degree of redundancy shall correspond to the number of operators in the system, i. e. t wo. 6. 0 FAULT DETECTION Fault detection circuitry shall be incorporated in the Central Electronics Package. This circuitry shall continuously test all possible audio and data paths in all the electronic rncedules within the central electronics package, and shall complete thesr,. tests within not more than 90 seconds. Any test which results in an error or failure shall cause a switch to the second system timer module. If this does not correct the problem then a switch back to the original system timer shall occur and the failed module shall electronically removed from the bus structure. This process shall take less than ten seconds for arty single module failure. To Facilitate servicing of the failed module an error tone and message shall be sent to each console position and a LED indicator shall be activated at the failed module. A detailed description, in plain English, shall be longed on a system printer that is connected to one of the operator interface modules. NOTE: please state a delete option for the above referenced printer. 7. 0 ENCLOSURE GENERAL DESCRIPTION All cabinetry shall consist of a structural frame and exterior, decorative panels and trim. The structural frame members shall be of at least 14 gauge cold rolled steel. The decorative panel, and trim to be of at least 19 gauge cold rolled steel, or at least 1/4 inch thick structural foam plastic. C City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - • The sheet metal finish shall be a vinyl polyester baked enamel. The plastic shall be coated with an abrasive resistant chemical finish. The trim bezel shall match the color of the laminate on the writing surface. The writing surface shall consist of a rnelarn:ine type top surface and edges laminated to a warn resistant core. If the core material is a wood product, the bottom surface roust be laminated with a melamine vapor barrier to prevent warpage. Also as are option it is required that vendors provide the Deoart- merit with prices for desk top enclosures. See the attached drawing covering console lay-out and furnature requirements. 8. 0 REVEIVER VOTING SYSTEM - GENERAL It is a requirement that bidders supply that eauiprnent necessary for establishing either voting receivers or voting base stations with ars associated comparator at three (3) receiving Doints. System layout as follows: 1. One site located at the Police Services complex in Tigard. This site to be a full base station with receiver voting capabilities. 2. One receiver/voting site to be located at the Tualatin Fire District Site at Portland Community College. 3. The third receiver site to be located at The Tualatin Fire District site in King City. 4. The comparator to be located at the New Police and connected to the new console through a comparator- status/control panel. Wire/line will be run via Telco from the New Police Services Complex to the Tualatin Fire District Station ire Tigard. From This point voting of the two remote sites will be through a tie-- ire with the Fire District' s existing microwave system. Vendors are required to Provide parts and pricing for this microwave tie--- . ire. The Fire District' s microwave system is a Motorola Star Point, 2GHz. system. If further- inforrnatior, is needed concerninn this microwave systern, contact with the Fire District can be made by contacting Ron Rostrna, Communication Specialists, Tualatin Fire District. City of Tigard - police Communications Console - 8. 1 VOTING/RECEIVER SPECIFICATIONS Receivers Power Supply 120 VAC 50/60 Hz- (13. 6 DC) Emergency Power Optional (please quote) Battery back-up with tone alert/status Audio Output +11 dbrn rnin. Line Equalizer Required Line Audio Response +1, -3 db, 300-•3000 Hz (1KHz ref) Output Distoration Less than 3Y. FM Hum and Noise -55 db Temp Range to Specifications -30 to 60 deoree C 8.2 COMPARATORS Initial Selection Less thar, 40 msec. Switching Time Less than 1 msec. Data Handel ing Votes (lock LID C,Dt ion available) Automatic Line Level Adjust Required Power Supply 120 VAC - 50/60 Hz (13. 8 VDC) Emergency Power Please ouote oiptional battery with Dower reverting and charging circuit Audio Input SensitivitY -25 dbrn @ 1020 HZ- Audio ~Audio Output Level +11 dbrn max. Audio Freauency Response (+-) 1Db, 300-3000 H , Audio Distoration Less than 3% & 1000 Hzz Hum and Noise -50 db. 4 City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - SPECIAL NOTE: If bidders elect to provide a base station(s) instead of stand alone voting receivers the following specifications MIASt be met Number of Freauencies/Transmit T2/R2 Power Output 100-50/variableA Intermod -85 db Spurs and Image Rejection 100 db inin. Selectivity/EIA SINAD -100 db Remote Control Tone Service Access Single side service access to all station components and test ooints. . . i. e. station must be capable of being mounted acainst a wall to save site space. r City of Tigard - Police Communications Console - f DIRBCT DISPATCHING COSTS BID SHEET VENDOR 1. Dispatching Duties Talk Time $ 2. Administrative Phone Call Management Routing Management Talk Time $ 3. Teletype Operation and Message Relay to Tigard Police Department $ 4. Complaint Log Typing, Updated and Delivered to Tigard Police Dept. 3 times daily $ 5. Aid to Citizens/Agencies (walk-in traffic/after hours) via phone relay 6. Warrant File Management $ 7. Response Time Analysis Reporting Monthly $ 8. Audio/Visual Monitoring Prisoner Holding Area $ 9. Staffing Requirements at Tigard Police Dept. Building when Prisoners in Holding Area $ 10. Hourly Prisoner Holding Area Inspections when Prisoners are in Holding Area $ 11. Business Emergency Notification Management System $ 12. Special Intervention Resource Information Management System $ `_ DIRECT DISPATCHING COST BID EVALUATION MATRIX SHEET Vendor Tigard Police Tigard Police Indirect Transfer Costs 1. Dispatch Duties $ $ $ 2. Phone Call Routing Talk Time $ _ $ $ 3. Teletype Operation & Message $ $ $ Relay ! Csnplaint Log Duties $ $ $ t� 5. Aid to Citizens/Agencies $ $ $ (after hours/walk-in traffic) 6. Warrant File Management $ $ $ 7. Response Time Analysis $ $ $ 8. Audio/Visual Monitoring $ $ $ 9. Staffing Requirements $ $ $ 10. Hourly Prisoner Inspection $ $ $ 11. E mrgency Business Notification $ $ $ 12. Special Intervention Resource $ $ $ Information Managernent SUB TOTAL: $ $ $ INDIRECT DISPATCHING COSTS BID SHEEP VENDOR 1. Conu unication System Hardware $ 2. Dispatching Materials and Supplies (Dispatch time $ _ clock, dispatch cards, teletype paper, recorder tapes) 3. Warrant File Management System $ _ ----- (Limited Access Security) 4. Long Distance Phone Call Charges $ Estimated Yearly Cost $9,900 5. Phone System for Call Routing Between Dispatch $ Center to Police Dept. 6. Dedicated Phone Line at Tigard Police Dept. $ to Dispatch Center (After Hours Phone) 7. Electronic Security Door Control (at Dispatch Center) System (sally port, prisoner booking, entrance) $ 8. Prisoner Holding Facility Monitoring $ System at Dispatch Center 9. Teletype Lease and Interface w/ Police Dept. (to include slaved printer at Police Dept.) $ 10. Base Radio & Electronic Equipment Maintenance (FCC licensed or certified or equivalent $ technician) 11. Dedicated Phone Line Leases from City of Tigard $ to Dispatch Center 12. Civic Center Fire and Burglary $ Alarm System 13. Special Intervention Resource Information System $ Files, etc. 14. Local Master File System (Alpha File) Management System (requires limited access security) NOTE: Requires duplication of existing master file $ C TOTAL DISPATCHING COST BID SHEET VENDOR DIRDCT DISPATCHING COSTS $ INDIRDCT DISPATCHING COSTS $ TOTAL BID: $ i 4 iy S L f INDIRECT DISPATCHING COST BID EVALUATION MATRIX Sli= Tigard Police Tigard Police Vendor — Indirect 'Transfer Costs $ 1. Conmunicatioh System Hardware $ ___ --- S - — 2. Dispatching Materials & Supplies 3. Warrant File Management System $ $ $ (Limited Access Security) $ 4. Long Distance Phone Call Charges $ — 5. Phone System for Call Routing 6. Dedicated Phone Line at TPD $ (After Hours Phone) $ 7. Electronic Security Door Control $_ — System (sally port, prisoner booking, entrance) g. Prisoner Holding Monitoring $ System Lease and Interface 9, Teletype printer at (including slaved p TPD) $ 10. Base Radio & Equip-nt (including technician) $ 11. Dedicated Phone Line Leases $ $ 12. Civic Center Fire & Burglary $ $ Alarm System 13. Special Intervention Resource $ $ $ Information System 14. Local Master File System (limited access security) SUB TOTALS: ----- • f J / r TOTAL BID EVALUATION MATRIX SHEEP Vendor Tigard Police Tigard Police Indirect Transfer Costs _RECr DISPATCHING COSTS $ $ $ INDIRECT DISPATCHING COSTS $ $ $ TOTAL BID: $ $ $ i E==.°O,ern E y o e a o C o :. = a a, r, = u y v c_s. Vv c o 3 Vin a q y, H rC HC O y O yrN O Tc a W 0ZZ o E= yU U AC 6�a �Of V C C V v o •�a« A 6 v E o i>,'E.E ayv � oma+ ev n7C \Y //� p� ep °A Y� O.O V C O aO p aqi C F w V aO 'a d A y v L1""' y q =_4 A M. woqpM '0 `! O y 500 7 y •V.. �: V y C cd v O y d.0..u_ a0 C >W= tC *- 4z0 G.� a+ C Vy a�Ci a n a_E, u "v g. `. `e it -"b° � `. y�•o .,a V ay C,. r G. O "' O m C A'G.O C w 'V C m`: 00 O,., p ° 0. U C j O H C O C O E b E n C C C O O O c ai mcgd' W'O �� v? N c, m nts SEES °° v.�.y_.a v 9 C y N.._.p6� m y -_ y c0 r C c0 A O d C N 00 cd e0 C ►.. ,SC V H � = V > C C V 000 ✓ _ y r n .0=: Ev 'M� hoc '�$ �'rO/ ` �A�op� ,q, "fib ro t� p G 00—w=.. = d'A p N ay ,,>', P.> dO. W C4 r C p •p y W y C m ..~. q._ r 0 0 ..r'.. y o� m� W a c.y v n u p� .. c`.' „ pK`-," �'$ �� 3 vim = o�v�.E «: � •c 00 O A y y b d s - =31 C b m r V b tVj a 0E A 'V w.-U 7 G.V p, O T Zj qQ V = C C y 'd q O �yaM�a $oaEiy �cay � ,� y . yoao 3maro ►o. v-- IaoC EaaaO, �+ d c� ,,GjGOoC V.Gr 3 =F w a p v C u "yee�� o ca F d.•' U G O d p" [i a V a y m m� ... o S'fii p � V � � � eVo ESiL�, wti� c.a > a10 C ° EP.' Em�u EmE om . Vt=il =M1. V a0 2; t; V O a0 3c�> noor � � pew E,vA.,..3mc AE .CO Us- X� 9 > a = R, 00 ie� VIE og' it r y OY p 1�. M y^ V' aq9�. , a / ♦ a"$ HayiP • C.nd: r r 0 C Wa °$ =v.o aQ Z. 233 C � he. g ;o.+ V� o HyO4v"p VAVA A .seAE O 0 41 O ►- �o� SQ Fav �mvEa t y V se ce 4.=n O C C , C V M a V y m I 3z: tl3 � g � z I a �i VVAWr:— "' q = WAR►, 136 L PCZ=9 c v � aoL �c.» g V c �yQE CtsOF- .; E mu c . w W>v " g � Q � M '�V' r� O o A v~ p o ge o y o A vo= o c F v u x b a co,�aE35baF.`E91i MIS 9.3 a nE v3v � �iE- u i IMA �3p.o a W k O'.••. '.Q�7_ g A—3 S.� .0 4 A e•�j 7 O.{4�u 16* G A� V y� W ONS `noW '.� `=� W �o ajEo 0 Z_Bw � ab3 $ o3a<C� o _3v .., P . oma ►. «� s CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ! COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Cl AGENDA OF: AGENDA ITEM �l: __.L._ DATE SUBMITTED: 9/4/84 PREVIOUS ACTION: July Motion for ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Plan IV & Study Council Medical Benefits Discussion PREPARED BY: _ REQUESTED BY: Councilor Edin k DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: _ _ CITY ADMINISTRATOR: E INFORMATION SUMMARY As a part of our labor negotiations this spring, the City and TMEA/OPEU reviewed various medical plans to see if we could find a better plan for the contract dollar. The group plans through the League were found to be the best values. According to League rules under its agreement with Blue Cross, any benefit program changes must be by 8/1 of each year. Council moved 3-2 in July to restore Council. benefits to Plan IV full--family fully City paid. That decision would normally remain in effect until next year. Councilor Edin, in i reviewing benefit levels and plan costs, was also able to obtain the attached waiver. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Do nothing. Stay with Council medical benefits at Plan IV, full-family, fully City paid. 2. Reconsider Budget Committee's recommendation for Plan II, fully City paid for Councilors and 50% City paid for dependents. 3. Reconsider after discussion. SUGGESTED ACTION Discussion by Council at request of Councilor Edin. Staff makes no recommendation. (RWJ:pm/0571p) _�_�-.'t J'.G•:•]..}:.i4:1�1 ... _u.s -. s.�r.a "-rsia. L'�.:_�-.. � - (.:"�.irr.. ..... .+�rYrJ• .t.....__.--.. Blue Cross Blue Shield �•� of Oregon R • P.O.Box 1271 100 S.W.Market Street Portland.Oregon 97207 503 225-5221 August 22, 1984 Bob Jean City Administrator City Of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 s Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: City of Tigard Blue Cross/Blue Shield Account #96058 Dear Bob: This letter is to confirm our earlier conversations whereby we will allow the city council members to transfer to the Plan 2 program in mid year should they decide to accept this alternate plan. r Should you negotiate a change with the police employees to transfer to the alternate Plan 2 in mid year we will also be agreeable to this change. Enclosed for your review is a short benefit and rate comparison between the League of Oregon City's four medical plans. Please let me know if I can be of any help. Sincerely, DG�CL� rt Odell Marketing Representative P.S. Attached is a booklet on a new plan now available which has some excellent cost containment features. RD/cfh cc: Phil Edin C 3�It:iB'a`_'£^lC.:¢.:��fdif5fY3..vht7:1.,=:. ,.._y_. �.__....-.__. � ._... .. ._..._ ...._ '_...�c� __.___ _ -o..'►-....... ....-.......�_ _. .. .�_.'�..'.".-"_'_ W N T jt N '7 O 1 .•t O ON u ON dtiC�• E C roMw NO`D -.a d1 0.11 w wT Wd aQi v'0ONW 4 ro > ^ a� y O T t"40 1 C)U, It1 to N Y Y L 4 1 (.. N d /tO d N Ln w C ro ro U�L y _ & O •4 o:d tL ;G 0.uC oG++ V U V E u u Y d 3:•+ LO w W U U U W N U U U t/1 ►�•t C V u G. 0. U.j-�:� O 1 u N:.> >•a V J:J z > > OO > ..t ... .�..tam �.�e ..,��:'ve' �� O 000 N 60 O d w•••t' , Eln000 EO 4000 o V30 0 00 C) o•--•+ c w d co N w 4.0000 (1O 000 O UOcoO ON O 00 C ,...t.-,O O a 0..N.M a VI 1'•1.•/N r4 N.N -4 r -4 .••/ .-t Vf.-t .-1 N r•4 .-1.•a N ""1 H VY W N � Q O � N 7j W t11 d 'A u 19 G 0 •ua 3..Oi u > ori V aci W w •.+ •.t .0 d 10 O C N T 4 0 0. w V d t •.1 O d T••'1 c•••1 O N •0 d N.-. V C,'D E d t7u0 d t 7N Vus wd bOU 7 ` - d to H N 2 L•.+ C'0 ro ro C t0 - U E O v C - d•.a O• '0 d O P V U d ro d t 0 .-a-YTW M to N G uO'1 W N U O ro ro to u d a•O -.t.n w O 1 •A U d � N Y ro 7.11 > > ro N d U N U !J '0 to 0• O N W .•1 .+ '0 -•• .A 6 ro C 1103 O d •., ro N d N 4 w y N .G O 17 Y - 4 U Y d H 1r wpus0 R ro 0 .0 N OGN d 5 O .� N w N d 1 1 S O .'0 .� C .-. 0. 4 n N r1 d 2 O t••. •.+ 0 0 0 • O d C. N-`-' 0 0 0• 0 0 0 .0 .0 10 to EW,000N0 N N-d O-1n V% O•''1 N v'1 LAO Y O Y Nu O Y O :J .+.-a-4 d d.0 O Co Cl\O .••t 0 N . 00.••t co h O 1y 0 .••t-4 1n C O F •A 14-4 O O �. 0, to a:to N t'l•'4.-t.-t r1.4 NtnN HNN Vf V> N E o 0 � � vrvr al h to C J N to N J .0 U H N N d N �• H Y a N V ++ d0c ro >' NN++ N 00-1 Ero W ws:.-+ u > {.. d •+ •.1 T T T TN T N T Z.0 .G E 6 t.1 T 1 0 Y Y O Y O J N ..7 dOON 'GC1• F GFC� C roC d CCO C C4 % 1 go."u O 4 1 0 000 O '00 E O 0� O NN1/1 O 1 ro N 2 . U 6.� .•a.--t �.-, O.-•t w .•i C C Tp E r 8 s •. 1 c1 >. O ..in U.�: d d to d to to ro ro C ro t•1 t0 0 C s s to J ...1•.a Vs d ..••]]] N .Co u u u to U U U V O U V N N C,4 Y C VOj y fa Y O ro cc u ..a .+.,,•.a 4 •d 1 ro O O O O ++ C N u a W vv+ > > ro •10 -• '0vvV 0 '0 6 •+ C C ++ C oou w.0 0 to>44D O -..a 14 0.d ro >+ d d d d V od d ro +4•.1 +•1 te'l O d to N •0 h 4 4 y N v U-4 E.fes.=r E V.= �I U 0. 0. C•--t .--t L d 1 O �• .•+ d d vY A. 0. ro 0 •.1 C ;J •.a 00. 0 Y .-1 to 7 w ro .--t t9 w \� � � V Y CI 1 1 = 4 w b O 4 4 4 w 4 $. w'0 40 0 •.4 anan .0 u .,4 ra d \ ..t .•art o o d o 0 0 0 o 0 40 a o d o 404094 w r c E el O p 5 8 0 u 8 E v'1 O 40 0 N..-t ••�� •�•�•^+•�•-� O•� VI .."1� O - .O d O O o T d O v N .-7 .a.f1•.a d d.0 O O O- ro ro t0 tQ ttl 17 O rJ O t7 en N t•1 Co C L Y O U E ,..1 uY O rz F. N J fn N t'1.-a.-t.-•1.w v s. 's:.^.......i. .-t.^-. r. S N N to.•-1 p 0.0."4 U S Vf us t» ,t s s \ W 00 7 7 '0u W u u N C O N - . dp H U .0.0.0 -4.A 6 4 .�-tpt-4-4 a 40 u u u -.t u u u .-4 O z 3 t,� �..-e.r.-a�..•+.r .--t.-•1.r .-a .-t.--t.•a ra.-t .+ .�.•t .r •C'0-U N to -01010 ++ E O a ro t0 17 to 10 ro 17 t0 ro �7 t0 D a sto Co c3 to c.0q d d d e u W d do E-4 O 4 Q .+ u UUUvvu uuu v VU U u V U u "0.00•., C -000Od x C, (M F M•.t•.t•.t•.4 v4•.a+•1 ..d•.t ••4 ..1•.a •.1 d ✓1 S ro Ln W O -a':J'0'0-* 'O '0 '0'0-0-0•0 0-0 -a 1010--c 4 4 4o E w w 4 - U E O an W Q .-r d 0 :Jdd00 CD V ddddd dd v •p9) d uu Y.!1E Yuuvs E•+ COi E moi^.i.E L%I. �'�.i.�.f.. -^-.�. �<-• _ d lu ^' W .•1 ro W W W 0.-1 .� N 4 60 U w v 4 4 w w w W w W w w w w w W w 4 W cc1. w 4 ro ro ro I� E ro h O E ro .., ... v vt z O•.. 0.0.0.0.0.0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o H.. a+•.t W Eo s o e W .•�U �..a-��.y.-�...1 .000•-•t-•�-•-'t •.�•,.-t•.-•t•.�...� -. --..^� •.-t•�.•� •:i� X �':i.`• X d O�u 0 x C. ro 7 ro �7 n ro 1. ro ro 1y K ro 0 ro 17 ro ro A ro OOO O ro OOO 0.ro > N n V. o ,J tis.}: s s.F.::...�.1 v s'.:. �:c.s.%.S �v •�• F... .: m 1�co u E 000000 7%O an to a0 d w c T .+ 0 q u 9 C N N u..t U 0 .0 N c t+. d O c r w 0 w u .11 a v U W E•--1 Y a ' Q. A DDo 0- VI7 N zea U N J Q. 'q T W L U 'y' L. N p� '7 u •w a 0 U -1 u U N V :� 13 1 w O 1 1. C 3. a F ^' V O U .-.V) o O w u 1 d 0 U > .r d ,y 13p VOU O N .+UvuC x �'++ : w •.roiY CL uto ..7 ro 7U O t+. O W d T d •.t r v C.0 ' W to O > U 7 u N C.+ .•+ 11•0,•. d•-+ u u 4-+ .. C,I Y C CC.! L C .V. d G H 3 a 'L •.+ C V C K d 7 '7 9 4 0 .+ Y . I V ro ro .a C J W ,Ea.••1 N O N W .. W N N d ro.--t 7 t �+U d Y C.$4 u 0 U u d C .a7 ,J 0+4 ... u d++ W ro v ro C oD c-+ ro E u Vl U•.t O w ro O O. 1F7 O ^>� O %'0 ty rob u E.0 w d U. d 7 V a N•a M d•.t P. dU 1 V 0.•a ro r� •.+ O E u u C) l.0.+ X d N O E w 1/J•W w..t t u C C u 4 u to u N 0. -.I U N O. a Lo O �•+ E 1 0 x c E X E (I r to O�c in ro Go-,4 �+ 7 d C E 7 d G X tA 21.6 L'SO W►tW W61a G6 u0 "OS:.7n4S O 0. .14 praa s. w- -t v nS r .dO•� �6U i V cc S to R] G• '84-85 Premium Year "2- i r M E M O R A N D U M t TO: Mayor and City Council DATE: August 30, 1984 FROM: TMEA/OPEU Members SUBJECT: Health Benefits During our last negotiating session, for this current contract, it was brought to the bargaining table that due to the tremendous cost increases, the City could no longer afford to pay Full Family Blue Cross Plan IV, and needed to put a ceiling on the costs the City could pay. Being concerned, and realizing that there has been a drastic increase in the costs of benefits, we as a bargaining unit, agreed to accept_ this maximum I amount to be paid by the City, and lower our coverage to Blue Cross Plan II, showing our good faith. s Since that time, it was brought to our attention that the Mayor, and City Council voted to reinstate their medi(-al benefits to Full Family Coverage, Blue Cross Plan IV. One of the reasons for our agreeing to the change, and not continuing to bargain to keep our coverage as before, was the fact that you, our City Council had shown us that you were going to take the lower benefit to help the financial ur decision was only temporary, we would cause. Also, if we had realized that yoj � not have given up another benefit quite so easily. We hope that this is not a reflection of the way you value us as City employees, and trust that future negotiations will demonstrate good faith bargaining on both sides of the table. MEMORANDUM { CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 9-10-84 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator �� ) x SUBJECT: Monthly Council Meeting Reimburs ents uested that Council clarify its meeting reimbursement Councilor Scott has req allows for $15 per Council meeting with a $60/month policy. Current Policy maximum. The questions are: o Does "Council meeting" include just the Regular r Not nd Special meetings with normal full agendas? joint short 15 minute Special Meetings? Not j meeings with a Board or Committee? Not a Budget Committee? a If more than four "Council Meetings" are attended in a month, do they count as a credit or average for meetings missed in other months that quarter? BJ: lw/1960A /A `L MEMORANDUM i CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Mayor and City Council September 18, 1984 FROM: Jerri L. Widner, Finance Director SUBJECT: DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY FOR AUGUST 1984 ------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------- ACCOUNTING The month of August was devoted to the audit schedules and getting three cycles of sewer bills assembled and mailed. Mary Strickland, Accounting Manager's last day with the City was July 31, 1984 which meant that the Finance Director and the two other accounting members shouldered the audit work together. Additional work will be necessary in September. The catch-up sewer bills have now all been sent out. The cycles should be on a routine schedule from here on. WORD PROCESSING The court clerk/cashier became ill the middle of August and has only returned to work temporarily September 17, 1984. She will be out again for surgery on her hand. This has meant that the Deputy City Recorder, Assistant Finance Director and the Finance Director have had to cover the position. The Deputy City Recorder has done the municipal court work and most of the cashiering. The Assistant Finance Director has been taking minutes at City Council meetings and the Finance Director has been filling in where necessary. Word Processing had only one operator to support the other departments during August, yet was able to get the benefits brochure and the Personnel Manual revised and copied. The receptionist was on vacation during the last week of August when two cycles of sewer bills were mailed with double billings. There were so many phone inquiries that the people covering the telephone were unable to write down all of them. We estimate 12,000 calls in August and 4,000 walk-ins. Again coverage of this position was by the Deputy City Recorder, Finance Director and an OAIII. ADMINISTRATION As you can read from above, the administration of Finance has become a Jill-of-all-trades and yet has been able to prepare and sell a Bancroft bond issue, bill Bancroft accounts and keep up with election requirements. We would like it to slow down, but vacations throughout September, October, November and December will keep the Finance area very busy. (0599F) tIGARDLIBRARY PUBLICPhone 8399511 12588 SW Main•Tigard. Or.97223 MONTHLY REPORT August 1984 TO: Library Board City Council FROM: City Librarian CLIG: On August 9 the City Librarian's Interest Group (CLIG) consisting of all city librarians from Washington County met to discuss matters of mutual interest and concerns regarding the future of Washington County Cooperative Library Service (WCCLS). Grant: On August 15, at a meeting of the Portland Eagles Auxiliary No. 4, the Tigard Public Library was presented with a $200 grant to buy large print books. This same group made a $100 grant to the library in November 1982. Volunteers: Thirty-three volunteers worked a total of 240 hours; a daily average of 8.89 hours. Three community service volunteers worked 24.5 hours; a daily average of 9.1 hours. Sarah Shelledy, the JTPA assignee, completed her summer program, working a total of 96 hours. We have begun tracking staff time that is spent with volunteers for scheduling, preparation of work assign- ments, training, daily instruction, review of work, counseling and paper work. For this first month, the total number of staff hours totaled 21.7; daily average of .8 hours. Personnel: Holly Humston, library aide, resigned because of moving from the area. Pam Rasmussen returned on a call-back from lay-off to permanent part- time aide. Youth Services: The summer reading program ended in August with two meetings of the Oregon Reading Team and awards party. At the Reading Team meetings participants enjoyed stories, riddles and games. On August 1, Scott Davis presented a magic show. He dressed as a clown, did magic tricks and con- cluded with balloon art. Sixty-three children attended as well as a good number of parents. The awards party was held in Cook Park on August 15, with thirty-five children in attendance. There were games, face painting, prizes and refreshments. Eight volunteers contributed 13 hours to help with this party. Work Indicators: August 1984 August 1983 Adult Materials 5806 7425 Juvenile Materials 3233 3902 Total Circulation 9039 11,327 Days of Service 23 22 Average Daily Circulation 393 515 Increase/Decrease Circulation -24% 4% Reference/Readers Advisory 278 438 Materials Added 481 592 Materials Withdrawn 797 666 Story Time Total 59 59 Special Programs 134 151 Borrowers: New/Renewal 128/125=253 214/131=345 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON i COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY f AGENDA OF: September 24, 1984 AGENDA ITEM #: 1 '_e DATE SUBMITTED: Sept. 20, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Monthly RS-port - August - Planning and REQUESrEO BY: Development ' ) _ DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: -�/��L ' /�_ CITY ADMINISTRATOR: INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached is the monthly report for Planning and Development for August, 1984. Enclosed are: Cover memo - including Comprehensive Plan 6 Economic Development update. Building Division Report Planning Commission minutes, Hearings Officer decision and Planning Directors decisions. { Annexation Report Code Enforcement Report Econopic Development Minutes Engineering Division Report ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED SUGGESTED ACTION Accept and place on file. r (WAM:pm/0638P) MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Members of the City Council September 17, 1984 FROM: William A. Monahan Director of Planning & Development SUBJECT: Monthly Report - August, 1984 Attached please find the Monthly Report for August prepared by the Department of Planning and Development. Elements of the report are: Building Division Report Planning Decisions Annexation Report Code Enforcement Report Economic Development Committee Minutes - August 15 meeting Engineering Division Report Building activity in August showed a significant increase in fees although the number of permits decreased in single family construction. Fees for both Building permits and plans checks were the highest since May of 1983. A large amount of commercial activity was initiated as four commercial construction projects, totaling 100,272 square feet valued at $1,708,000, was initiated. A list of commercial activity since July is contained in the Building Division report. Following is a comparison of building activity for 1983 and 1984 through August: Through August 1983 Through August 1984 Single Family Permits 166 136 Commercial Permits 11 31 Building Permit Fees $76,439.31 $76,460.60 Plan Check Fees $47,211.39 $38,540.65 Plumbing Permits $24,042.35 $24,492.59 Mechanical Permits $3,736.94 $3,503.02 Sign Permits $1,235.00 $1,520.00 Valuation $16,339,491.00 $16,931,903.00 t E Comprehensive Planning - The City's plan and In Order To Comply materials are being evaluated by LCDC. We are in regular contact with LCDC staff as they ( review the submittals. Our acknowledgment hearing will be held in October. Economic Development - The Committee met on August 15 and adopted its Economic Development Action Plan. The Plan was then accepted by the City Council. Implementation activities will begin in September. (WAM:pm/0638P) MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: September 6, 1984 SUBJECT: Monthly Report for month of AUGUST - Building Division August's building activities include permits for 2 signs, 10 single family residential, 9 residential alter/repair, 9 commercial, 13 commercial alter/repair, 3 fill, 1 eJucationel alter/repair and 1 pool for a total valuation of $3,613,499.00 Fees for 46 permits $22,246.73 Fees for 2 signs 50.00 Plumbing Acitivity - 39 3,935.00 Mechanical Activity - 27 485.50 TOTAL. . ... . .$ $26,717.23 Sewer Connections - 19 $25,581.00 Sewer Inspections - 18 $ 720.00 i t i F p7 7 $ 888888888888888S88R8888888888888888888888 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :aoo�. eoa, r♦ .or+ oeov► o �na0000eOr+ oor• I*iv+ or. A r. r+ eo�+ ri > IA �O A ♦ �O {A � � A r.l ri .� .� � "•i 9.4 N PI 'p � Wl% in 0`R � 0`6 O`6 O`6 O`6 O`R `i � 06 O4 O6 Oi 06 pi O4 06 O6 04 OR 06 06 < < < < < < < < < ! e < < < ! < e ! ! t i ..� ..r ..+ ..r ..+ ..� ..i ..r ..� ..r ..� ••+ ..a ..� ..r ..a ..r ..� ..� 1d �6 e0 AI 10 i0 /0 10 � r0 b 11 i0 1d M r0 M A M A A �0 y L1 y y L+ y J 1 W y L L it W y y y 1 .4 0 IA no M 0 41 1. w .4 -4i tL. 4 3. m t V G A Yi 01 OOr 10 tom+ .•moi �+ Aj Ad IJ G tO� x tyAv ve0�6 � � � OabLd 6p b6jj N c Y , Iiii ■ IA a � O o .-pi ti D G C O 41 � .-moi CO 10 ���� fr 01 tr J Ir > t0 1. A m < J «. ..+ ..+ ••r O b C C C C al it w . w w w Md J S wf O� /'f .•� .+ N ..i .•r P � g 10 •.� N O 1� r6 a� � < •-� .• a > 4 A . ,a� af�ox i► oc� c� $ i � ass � ., � � ma aimaaAa � � � � � � � � � � � O �p p A rOrU1NIfA � O ��pf NO � f O ��•iU1Nf NO � O � NN NO do 1A 10'1fb � � M1 0 fy W, wl 1. O wl rd r► 014 m do N f 44 00 V% W4 .0 N UI N N 04 P. W, � N V-4 m r.4 IA (,1 V4 �••� rl on � f•1 V4 a m Y1 NO 1O 1A 1A N .� .4 .r fn f .T N .••1 f f %D �D �D .� .r Off U1 N O �o ^ f U► GG on " Ff A 04 .i* r+ r♦ 0 rl m .r 0 0.4 r+ ra .+ r4 P. .r Oft .r .+ r4 P. .4 r4 r♦ r+ .r r, n F. r. .+ .+ .4 P V4 rl r+ r+ rd of < O w M t V y y m p M �p tom. ar "O� y b 01 CI m .04 9 AC �+ Cid Aa Of m E y�j yy � � �Qp`1� C AJ Le L lir C y t m .wp1 p� �4 tO Al V gs O N pE O > O $ aOb Lyy .~i itrC ) ayy y 1-4 D. 04 am 4 P-1 A8 y o p m 'd x w L, .A J JK •.r +j N M H lr ji O >A M E O O O �ti � � � Hgti � e• 8tiw� ti �t�� tio� 3 � �a� o. mti •, 1�� � � � I� � No$ o� � � � 8 8 M it d bd lb bd P y y y Ad 56in N P $ •i a o �+ ., Le AJ �e acre S I G N P E R M I T S August 1984 VALUATION CONTRACTOR ADDRESS 16165 SW 72nd Avenue N/A N/A Finzer Business Systems 13165 SW Pacific Hwy* John Poorman Total N/A 4 i i Y Yf 4 Z i i C COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY SINCE JULY 1984 Fiscal Year 84-85 Month Applicant Potential Address Valuation Sq.Foot July 84 Westwood Retail Store 11705 SW Pac. Hwy. $746,000. 26,240 July 84 Westwood Rax Restaurant 11701 SW Pac. Hwy. $207,000. 3,550 August 84 Bob Deckar Church 14125 SW Hall Bled $220,000. 8,162 August 84 Roger Belanich One Story Bldg. 10765 SW Greenburg $101,000. 5,760 August 84 Pac Trust Commercial Bldg. 16505 SW 72nd $826,000. 48,612 August 84 Pac Trust Commercial Bldg. 16250 SW Upper Bns $651,000. 38,300 August 84 Joseph Hogan Commercial Bldg. 11225 SW Greenburg $130,000. 7,600 i t 1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - AUGUST 7, 1984 1. Vice President Owens called the meeting to order at 7:38 P.M. The meeting was held at the Tigard School District - Board Room - 13137 SW Pacific Hwy. 2. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Vice President Owens; Commissioners Fyre, Butler, Vanderwood, Bergmann and Peterson. ABSENT: President Moen; Commissioner Leverett. STAFF: Director of Planning and Development William A. Monahan; Associate Planners Keith S. Liden and Elizabeth A. Newton; Secretary Diane M. Jelderks. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM JULY 24, 1984 o Commissioner Bergmann moved and Commissioner Fyre seconded to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioner present. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 APPEAL OF SDR 8-84A PUGET CORPORATION NPO # 5 An appeal of the Planning Director's conditions one through four which require dedication and half-street improvements for approval of the Site Development Review. o Associate Planner Liden reviewed the Director's decision and conditions that were being appealed. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION: o John Osborn, Attorney for the Puget Corporation requested that street improvements not be required at this time due to the economic factor. o Derek Hogarth, 7440 SW Bonita, Operations Manager for Puget Corporation read and submitted a letter into the record offering to sign and record a nonremonstrance agreement for the street improvements. o Jeff Levear, President-General Manager, supported the nonremonstrance agreement and explained how the project was being financed by a State Economic Bond for 20 years. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o No one appeared to speak. CROSS EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 7, 1984 PAGE 1 i i to se the o Commissioner Bergmann asked ner Liden explained how staff determined this was a City ( condition. Associate Plan ounsel had policy and also legal cadvised staff that a nonre zatrance may not be enforceable in the future. Discussion follc d. o Direct ,f Planning and Development explained that legal acoounsel stated they were not advisable, not non enforceable, nd that be 100% bonded. Further Discussion. improvements should PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION o Commission Butler stated he had reviewed all the conditions ovisiona nd for la are covered by City policy, however, there is no p nonremonstrance. o Commissioner, Peterson, Vanderwood, Bergmann, Fyre, and Owens favored a nonremonstrance agreement. Discussion followed regarding land dedication. o Commissioner Vanderwood moved and Commissioner Peterson seconded to and approve the appeal of SDR 8- e u, removing conditions one, two,iring a nonr monstrance based on the three and adding a condition req following findings: ( 1. The Decision contains no findings that street improves=rounding would be timely or that improvement would be supported by ommunity Development Code Section property owners. C 18.164.030.A.3. sion quire Puget make 2. Condition 1 through 4 unnecessary improvements at ethisitime.re community t Development Code Section 18.164.030. 3. Satisfactory guaranties by Puget that future improvements will be made n needed are available anshould lieu of presentstreet improvements. Ca Community Develop entacceptedre Code p Section 18.16,030.A.3. Motion carried by majority of Commissioners present. Commissioner Butler voting no. o Commission Butler made a minority report - He stated that there should be a City policy for nonremonstrance agreements, otherwise they were being inconsistent with the Code. 5.2 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD 3-84, The Fountains at Summerfield NPO # 6 A request by Tualatin Development Co. for conceptual plan approval for a 112 unit condominium development. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 7, 1984 PAGE 2 Associate Planner Liden wade staff's recommendation for approval with 15 conditions. He also stated that there needed to be some discussion and interpretation regarding20 foot setbackave from garages to property lines, since the project Also, a 100 ft. setback between single family residences in an established area and mutli-family units within a Developing area. The Code would appear to apply, except that this application is part of the Summerfield Planned Development. He continued by reviewing concerns submitted in writing by adjoining property owners who were unable to attend the hearing. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION 0 Vlad Voytilla, 15300 SW 116th, Tigard, clarified which streets were and were not dedicated. He stated the private streets would be maintained by the Fountains. The swimming pool will be maintained by the Summerfield Association. He showed pictures of a project which they had developed and is similar to the one that they are proposing. He reviewed changes which they had made from the existing plan. He asked that the condition to improve Naeve Road be clarified so that improvements be made when ar^ess is needed because of the phasing of the project. He also adds - sed concerns regarding several conditions. CCI-NPO COMMENTS o David Atkinson, 10460 SW Summerfield, representing NPO 0 6, stated they had reviewed the project and were concerned with the construction of the units, location of the swimming pool, as well as the improvement of Naeve Road. They did not support having a bicycle path. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Jack Biethan 15525 SW 109th read and submitted concerns regarding the development. The main concern being the location of the swimming pool. CROSS EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL o Discussion followed regarding the 100 ft. setback between single family and multi-family development, necessity of a cul-de-sac, public and private streets, improvements of Naeve Road, Bike Path, and the 20 ft. setback for garages to property lines. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioner 1. did not have a problem with not requiring the 20 foot set back for the garages. He did not feel a 100 foot buffering was necessary, however, he felt the swimming pool was too close to the single family development. The cul-de-sac requirement is not necessary. Naeve Road should be improved when necessary, but he was concerned with the width of the improvement. The bike path should be deleted. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 7, 1984 PAGE 3 ns width eve o Roadie 114th beingmaa raised ate street versus regarding publ public street, and a andthe t' cul-de-sac being mandatory. o Associate Planner Liden suggested having the applicant and Engineering Division work something out- Commissioner Commissioner Vanderwood was concerned about an adequate greenway between single-family and multi-family development. Ste feel the did not support the location of the swimming pool cul-de-sac made sense. o Commissioner Peterson felt that the City and applicant should be able to work out an agreement for the u a c. The hft swimminguffer pool was between in the wrong spot and he supported single-family and multi-family. o Commissioner Butler agreed that Engineering staff and the developer should be able to work out a compromise for the cul-de-sac. He supported the Code for a greenway buffer. Either make abutting units duplexes or eliminate them. o Commissioner Owens felt the greenway should be honored and the pool needed relocating. o Discussion followed regarding greenway, recreation facilities etting allowed in the greenway area, relocating the swimming pool, g the item over to September 4th, and phasing the project. o Commissioner Fyre moved and Commissioner Vanderwood seconded to approve Phase I of PD 3-84, subject to the following conditions: 1. Seven (7) sets of plan-profile public improvement construction plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a registered civil engineer, detailing all proposed improvements, shall be submitted to the City's Engineering Division for review. ence 2. Construction of proposed public improvements shall bli licnot improvement until after said Division has issued app of a performance plans (the Division will require posting stig fee and a sign bond), the payment of a permit installation/streetlight deposit and also, the toexecution issuance of construction compliance agreement just approved public improvement plansof Ti and (N.G.S. 1929). All 3. Vertical Datum shall be City 8 existing and established temporary bench marks in the vicinity of the project shall be shown on the construction drawing. 4. Compliance of 18.160.160 (all) with the following exceptions: 18.160.160 A.2 Capped 5/8" x 30" Iron Rods on surface of final lift will be acceptable. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 7, 1984 PAGE 4 5. The on-site sanitary and storm system shall be maintained by the homeowners association except for the main sewer line serving the project. 6. All sewer laterals serving more than one unit will require a joint maintennace agreement to be approved by the Engineering Division and recorded with the plat. 7. The storm and sanitary manholes at the north end of 114th Avenue shall be encompassed by public easements. 8. The on-site drainage ditch(s) shall be constructed to provide for ease of maintenance (wide b shallow, grass lined) and public safety. 9. The detailed plan shall be submitted for the Planning Director's approval prior to issuance of building permits. Said plan shall include the following modifications: a. Revised landscaping plan which is consistent with the Visual Clearance Chapter 18.102 of the Code. b. Buildings shall be relocated to meet the setback provisions of the R-20 zone. 10. Applicant will work with the NPO to address concerns for the location of the swimming pool and the 100 foot buffering strip. Applicant will work with Engineering staff to see if an alternative for the cul-de-sac is possible. 11. The project may be developed in phases for up to seven years from the date of detailed approval. A new application shall be required after seven years have passed. Also the additional phases are to be postponed until the September 4, 1984, Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present. 5.3 ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION ZCA 11-84 ELTON PHILLIPS NPO # 6 Request for recommendation to the City Council annexation of 4.5 acres into the City of Tigard and a Zone Change on the property from Washington County RS- to City of Tigard R-2. o Associate Planner Newton made staff's recommendation to forward the annexation to City Council and approve the Zone Change. Discussion followed regarding the zoning being requested. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o Elton Phillips 16565 SW 108th, stated he was not proposing any construction at this time. He would be installing sewer service. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 7, 1984 PAGE 5 1 PUBLIC TESTIMONY o No one appeared to speak. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION o Commissioner Bergmann moved and Commissioner Fyre seconded to forward the annexation request to City Council with recommendation of approval and approve with the zone change from Washington County RS 1 to City of Tigard R-2 upon approval of the annexation by the Boundary Commission, based on staff's findings and the following conditions. I. The annexation proposal shall be reviewed and approved by the Tigard Police Department. 2. All future development on the property shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Tigard. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioner present. 6. Other Business f o Tigard West final order held over to August 22, 1984. i o Sandlewood Park final order Commissioner Bergmann moved and Commissioner Peterson seconded to approve the final order -,s submitted by staff . Motion carried by majority of Commissioners present. Commissioner Vanderwood abstaining. 7. Meeting adjourned 10:20 PM Workshop followed until 11:15 PM. Diane M. Jelderks cretary ATTEST: Bonnie Owens, Vice-President C 0598P PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 7, 1984 PAGE 6 { BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) FOR A SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT TO ) ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF PARK ) No. FACILITIES, INCLUDING TRAILS, ) PICNIC TABLES, FOOTBRIDGE AND ) SL 8-84 OVERFLOW CHANNEL WITHIN THE ) 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN OF FANNO ) CREEK; City of Tigard, applicant. ) The above-entitled matter came before the Hearings Officer at the regularly scheduled meeting of August 23 , 1984 , at the Durham Waste Treatment Plant, in Tigard, Oregon; and The applicant requests a sensitive land permit to allow the de- velopment of a portion of the Fanno Creek Downtown park between Hall Blvd. and Ash Street within the 100-year flood plain on property zoned CBD (Central Business District) , property more specifically described as Tax Map 2S1 2DB, Tax Lot 400 and 500 and 2S1 2DA, Tax Lot 702 , City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon; and The Hearings Officer conducted a public hearing on August 23 , 1984 , at which time testimony, evidence, and the Planning Department Staff Report were received; and The Hearings Officer adopted the findings, the facts and conclusions contained in the Staff Report, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked "Exhibit A" and incorporated by reference herein; NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT SL 8-84 is approved subject to the following conditions: Page 1 - SL 8-84 1. The City shall comply with all conditions of the permit issued by the Division of State Lands. 2. The City shall follow the "Management Practices" described in the April 19, 1984 , letter received from G.A. Newgard of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 3. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final decision date. DATED this day of September, 1984. HEARINGS OFFICER APPROVED: i /SETH MASON t % t Page 2 - SL 8-84 j Place Under City of Tigard Oregon TEMPORARY USE PERMIT TU 15-84 PET PREVENT-A-CARE, INC. NPO # 2 The Planning Director has given approval to conduct a low cost dog and cat vaccination clinic on 8-29-84 from 9:30 AM - 11:30 AMSI the eDD lot and Plaza parking area, corner of SW Hall and Pacific Hwy. • / X 36 MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 3-84 EUGENE RIMKEIT NPO # 3 The Planning Director has given approval with conditions to divide a 1.53 acre parcel into three parcels of approximately 0.5 each on property zoned R-4.5, located at 13615 SW 121st Ave., Tigard (WCTM 2S1 3CB, lot 4900). Subject Sit The adopted finding of facts, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 12755 SW Ash, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. The decision shall be final on August 26, 1984. Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with section 18.32.290(A) and section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code, which provides that a written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is August 26, 1984. The hearing on an appeal will be De Novo. TT Publish August 0,1 984 PLACE UNDER CITY OF TIGARD OREGON SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 22-84 S 6 J PROPERTIES NPO # 7 The Planning Director has given approval with conditions to construct a 304 unit apartment complet on property zoned R-20 (Residential 20 units/acre), located south of Scholls Ferry Rd. & west of 121st Ave. (WCTM 151-34BC, Tax Lot 400). t R u. t LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT M 6-84 KEN WAYMIRE NPO # 5 The Planning Director has given approval with conditions to allow sideyard adjustments not to exceed five (5) ft. for all lots within Bond Park II, lots 25 through 48. Property is zoned R-12, located on the west side of 79th Ave., 270 ft. north of Durham Rd. oo■w.» rue do ALAMA RiD The adopted finding of facts, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 12755 SW Ash Avenue, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon, 97223. The decision shall be final on September 24, 1984. Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with section 18.32.290(A) and section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code, which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the City Recorder within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 4:30 P.M., September 24, 1984. The hearing on an appeal will be De Novo. TT: PublishJ 1984 PLACE UNDER CITY LOGO ( MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 4-84 HOWARD b NORMAN WEBB NPO # 3 The Planning Director has approved with conditions a request to divide a 1.48 parcel into two parcels of 53,738 and 10,731 sq. ft. on property zoned R-4.5. Located: 10160 SW Walnut St., Tigard (WCTM 2S1 2BC lot 1100). s CHARLE TIGAR LE SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 20-84 RICHARD SMITH NPO # 5 The Planning Director has approved with conditions a request for Site Development Review approval to establish four commercial buildings and related facilities on property zoned C-P (Commercial Professional). Located: Southwest corner of SW Hunziker St.. and 72nd AVe., Tigard (WCTM 2S1 1DB, lot 100). i TEMPORARY USE TU 16-84 TIGARD SOCCER CLUB NPO # 6 The Planning Director has approved a request by the Tigard Soccer Club to hold a bake sale on Saturday, September 8, 1984, in Cook Park as a fund raiser for the Soccer Club. (WCTM 2S1 14A lot 900). .T� Cos$ 0 JECT CITY S ""` OF N T The adopted finding of facts, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 12755 SW Ash Avenue, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon, 97223. The decision shall be final on September 10, 1984. Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with section 18.32.290(A) and section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code, which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the City Recorder within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 4:30 P.M., September 10, 1984. The hearing on an appeat will be De Novo. TT: Publish August 30, 1984 PLACE UNDER CITY OF TIGARD OREGON SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 18-84 ROBINSON The Planning Director has given approval with conditions to construct several office-1 industrial buildings and related facilities on property zoned I-P. Located on S.W. Nimbus Avenue, Tigard (WCTM 1S1-34AC, T.L. 2600). I ' YRset� — - � 271 26 ' \74 !S j /1;LIj1 � 1 r VARIANCE 14-84 James Moellman The Planning Director has given approval with conditions for a variance to allow the re-establishment of a non-conforming residential use on a property zoned C-N. Located on 9960 SW Walnut St. , Tigard (WCTM 2S1-2BD, T.L. 2200) " CNARLE 11 , F TIGAR •�ELE ' The adopted finding of facts, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 12755 SW Ash Avenue, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon, 97223. The decision shall be final on September 3, 1984. Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with section 18.32.290(A) and section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code, which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the City Recorder within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 4:30 P.M., September 3, 1984. The hearing on an appeal will be De Novo. TT: Publish 1984 PLACE UNDER CITY LOGO SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 19-84 VARIANCE V 13-84 KEN ALLISON NPO # 1 The Planning Director has approved Site Development Review and Variance with conditions to construct a four unit apartment building and associated facilities. The property is zoned CBD (Central Business District) Located: 9655 SW McKenzie St., (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2AC lot 1800). CHARLE f TIGAR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 21-84 GRED 6 GEORGE MULL NPO # 5 The Planning Director has approved with conditions a request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 3600 Sq. ft. warehouse building and related facilities on property zoned I-P (Industrial Park). Located: 9738 SW Tigard Street, Tigard (WCTM 2S1 2BA lot 600). The adopted finding of facts, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 12755 SW Ash Avenue, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon, 97223. The decision shall be final on September 10, 1984. Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with section 18.32.290(A) and section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code, which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the City Recorder within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 4:30 P.M., September 10, 1984. The hearing on an appeal will be De Novo. TT: Publish September 6, 1984 o a e O � U w z V t a o4 w a d s 00 IT N o+ 00Oi OHOQA • ea L in. 00 Opt dpl ti IN cn d Z O N H � Z co >+ H 00CO2 mc s I to N O cV ay � ( m 0 .4 t p 00 O 00 00 rn H � rn rn ! Zs•+ • rOA OoO9 an O 4.1 4+ +j z oai O r r r r, u v v W 40 r 00 00 ad. • • • a a a 0 y r M 1 • e-1 w r • r •41 r+ r+ W a a 4A Aj AA °a a °a w s a 0 � a r y b 42r+ .o Id N c°0 a p� •, a as > a z $ v Od w � a � � 9 � � � ■ ■ � �10 \ 7 / } k 6 I I � t 21 ! J } I 5 � Al C § 2 m FA2 \ � � t s � 2 k k } ! a a _ a f AJ 04 � _ j ■ � ■ j � - � 7 k \ } _ en 0 � . , . . • ) � � . . - ■ | ■ | | ■ - k ■ ■ ■ m - - fm fn - . d - - i ' E � 9 a a a � ■ a � � a ■ � � ■ a ■ � § ev \ - f tj ` A 91 � � & ■ � ■ § . ■ ■ � � ■ � _ ■ � � � � a 2 § ■ I 2 ' ■ _ ' § _ 2 � § ■ $ _ \ � � � = � � Al � k � § ■ TIGARD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Minutes of August 15, 1984 7:30 AM Pioneer Pies Restaurant Members present: Mark Padgett, Chairman Tony Orlandini Bob Williams Amo De Bernardis Jim Corliss Others Present: Geraldine Ball Bill Monahan The meeting was called to order by Mark Padgett. The minutes of the July 19, 1984 were approved as written. Mark initiated discussion of the draft action plan which Bill prepared based on previous Committee discussions. Amo suggested that schools be added to public services in the section related to services available to a site, item h. Subcommittees for special areas, headed by Committee members, will be recruited from interested citizens from the areas. The recent survey may be a source of Subcommittee members. Subcommittee assignments will be made in September. The Committee's role as advocates for economic development was discussed. The Committee input may act as a counterbalance to input from residental dominated NPO's. Tony pointed out that once the action plan is in place a potential developer can use the plan as support for his application. Mark noted that the Chairman could be responsible for coordinating the input of the Committee or Subcommittee when advocacy before a committee or City Council is needed. The Committee felt that industrial and commericial realtors should be added as another group to maintain contact with. Continuing involvement with the Chamber will be encouraged as Mark will contact the new president of the Chamber, Denny Purkey, to determine who the Chamber representative will be. The Committee voted unanimously to adopt the action plan as revised and submit it to Council for adoption, seconded by Jim. Bill will schedule the actin plan on the Council agenda and inform the Committee members. Publications of the BAT Team and TUEDL were distributed and discussed. Old business — None New business — Bill distributed a list of commercial and industrial projects approved during the past three fiscal years. A second list of pending projects was distributed showing that Tigard's present economic condition is also quite strong. The meeting was adjourned at 8:50. The next meeting will be held on Wednesday September 19, 1984 at 7:30 AM at Pioneer Pies. (WM:bs/0587P) MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: William A. Monahan, Director of Planning and Development Engineering FROM: Randy Clarno, g g Services Manager DATE: September 13, 1984 SUBJECT: Engineering Monthly Report for August 1984 Personnel Time Spent in Area I. Public Works Department Support A. S.W. O'Mara St., S.W. Franklin St. and S.W. Ash Ave. Interim Improvement Projects. B. Bonita Slide Repair Project C. Fanno Creek Park D. Annual Street Overlay Project E. Fees collected for the installation 20X of Street Signs (Public Improvement Projects) _ $107.10 II. Planning and Development Activities A. Development Application Review for 5% Engineering Standards. B. Public Improvement Plan Check, Fee 18% Collection and Construction Inspection. C. Processing Legal Forms, Citizen Assistance 19% and Other Agency Assistance. D. Special Project Activity 1. Field Control Network and Computer Aided Base Mapping. 2. Development Services Policies 13% E. Other Activities I. Street Opening Permits 2. Planning and Building Support 3. Administrative 4. Vacations, sick leave and other 25% Time Off. (Tote: Vacation Time was high this month as the summer months are coming to a end) P 6 D Total 80% F. Fees Collected 1. Project Fees a. Streetlight Deposits ($570.24) (Public Works) t b. Street and Sewer Permit Fees $4,119.96 Other Fees $ 806.76 (Str. Opening Permits, Etc. . ,) Total Engineering Service Fees $4,926.72 d F k� 5`f 1 (cz/0632P) { t r a t C } POLICE DEPARIIVn'i' I%Y)IM-iLY REPORT / �• August, 1984 TO: City Administrator/City Council FROM: Chief of Police I. Personnel The department is down one from full strength this month. One patrol officer voluntarily resigner] to take a job in a different field of employment. The average daily department strength this month was 16.0 as compared to 14.9 for August 1983. By division, the breakdown is as follows: Administration 1.8; Support Services 3.8; Patrol 7.4; Traffic 1.4 and Investigation 1.6. II. Service Delivery The department responded to 595 non-criminal calls for service in contrast to 582 calls in August 1983; year-to-date total is 5,101. Patrol Division's obligated time was 1,854.4 hours vs. 384.6 non- obligated hours. III. Crime There were 79 Part I crimes reported this month; 80 were reported in August last year. Of the Part I crimes reported, 38 were cleared, or 48.1%. The department responded to 73 Part II crimes, and 54 were cleared, or 73.9%. There were 86 persons charged this month as compared to 43 for this same time period last year. Part I crimes decreased .01% this month over August of 1983. The Investigative Division worked 16 active cases this month, and cleared 17, or 106.2% of their active cases. The property loss was $42,935, and $11,268 was recovered, or 26.2%. IV. Traffic Patrol Division responded to 27 accidents, of that number 5 were injury. There were 502 citations issued, as compared to 194 for this same time period last year. In addition, 401 warnings were given. The enforcement index was 64.40. V. Police Reserves The Reserve Unit worked 111 hours this month assisting the department in policing the community. The majority of this time was spent out in the community on patrol and assisting citizens. See attached monthly report frau the Reserves for a complete breakdown of their activities. VI. Special Assignments A. K-9 Recap (see attached report) B. Motorcycle Program (see attached report) C. Alarms and Permit Recap (see attached report) VII. Training A. Basic Dispatch School. our new dispatcher, Karen Rowden, attended the basic dispatch school at the Police Academy, receiving 40 hours of training. This school is BPST certified. B. K-9 School. officer DeVeny spent 24 hours at Camp Riley on the coast, receiving K-9 training in the areas of tracking, building searches, area and item searches, problem solving, and court procedures. i i Respectfully, 1 � R.B. Adams Chief of Police C r � O � r- fTl Cq 1 rn j\ O� OZ I'VNI �NS O Q1% C O�?t � orspgt M t�/N/N cyQ G c0 I % �F�qt/OSS {� �Rt °\4 FMY � qpM/N/st - - Q SpFc l QF �t r- D o m 0 O r I 0 D ti Q �/rqr/ONs r - GS w/�/TrFN W FTI SUsP PF 8SONs S(�Sp VFNjc�FS v"Z q 0 q'�EsrS qss/ST VgC,r/ON cyF�Ks COMMENTS K-9 MONTHLY RI-TORT August, 1984 The K-9 team operated at full strength during the month of August, 1984 with all three K-9s on line. There were 18 calls the K-9 team members responded to during the month of August, 1984. Of the 18 calls, there were 12 building searches conducted, 2 track calls, 3 area checks, and 1 bomb search made. During the searches and tracks that were made, there were 3 successes, whereby evidence was found as a result of the tracks, and in 2 cases, suspects were located and arrested by the responding K-9 unit. One suspect was found hiding under a vehicle, and 2 others were found hiding in the bushes. The total time spent on the above calls was 7.25 hours; total training time by all K-9 team members was 48 hours. There were no outside agency requested calls. August 24, 25 and 26th, Officer DeVeny received K-9 training at Seaside, Oregon, which was a working K-9 seminar. This training focused on tracking, building searches, area and item searches, problem solving, and court procedures. There was a lot of general information sharing as well. Lt. Robert J. Wheeler Patrol Division Cosmiander i i a MOTORCYCLE TRAFFIC UNIT REPORT August, 1984 i During the month of August, 1984 there were 27 traffic accidents; 5 injury, 22 non-injury. This is a 13% decrease over August, 1983, which had 31 total accidents, 12 of which were injury and 19 non-injury. This is a 58.3% reduction in injury accidents. Of the 27 accidents this rmnth, 16 or 59.2% were investigated by the Traffic Unit. Enforcement index this month is 64.40 as compared to 11.00 for the same period last year. Traffic Unit issued 187 hazardous, 85 non-hazardous, for a total of 272 citations, which is 54.2% of the total 502 traffic citations written by the entire police department. i d t f Lt. Robert J. Wheeler Patrol Division Camrander t P i C � f t ALARMS AND PERMIT RE-CAP ( Month of AUGUST, 1984 s THIS SAME MONTH % TOTAL TOTAL MONTH LAST YEAR CHANGE THIS YEAR LAST YEAR CHANGE TOTAL ALARMS. . . . . . 50 37 + 260 399 382 + 4% ' a. False. . . . . . . 48 36 + 25% 385 377 + 2% b. Bonafide. . . . 2 1 + 50% 14 13 + 7% r _ Q Permits Issued.. . . 8 11 - 27% 56 64 - 13% Permits Renewed. . . 52 50 + 4% 86 50 + 72% Permit Fees. . . . . . . $920 $1,025 - 10� $1,865 $1,825 + 2$ Permits Revoked. . . 6 2 + 66% 28 22 + 27% Revoked Fees. . . . . . $180 $185 2$ $1,760 $1,560 + 13$ MONTHLY SUMMARY STATEMENT: Please note a 26% increase in false alarms between 1983 and 1984 for August. However, there is only a 2% increase in false alarms for the first 8 months of 1984 corpared to the same time frame in 1983. C POLICE DEPARTMENT CONSOLIDATED MONTHLY REPORT FOR MONTH OF AUGUST 19 84 DISTRIBUTION OF PERSONNEL - --- AVERAGE ----�-------•-- ------ --- NUMERICAL STRENGTH _DAILY ABSEN(,E i AVERAGE FI- EC1 VE SIZE'^'Glfl End of Same This Same This , Last- Same - this Month Month Month ` Mont.h Month Month Month Last Last I I Last. Year Yc•at _ I Year TOTAL PERSONNEL 28 29 12.0 14.1 I' L6.0 15.2. 14.9 CHIEF'S OFFICE 3 3 1.2 _ 1.3 1.8_ _1.9_ 1.7 _ SERVICES DIVIS. 7 7 3.2 3.1 Y I 3.8 4.0_ ___3.9 PATROL DIVISION 13 14 5.6 7.5-Y 7.4 7.3 _6.5 TRAFFIC DIVIS. 2 2 .6 .7 1.4 .7 11.3 INVEST. SECTION 3 3 1.41.5 1.6- 1.3 1.5 FORCE ONE 14 14 6.4 7.2 �JL 7.6 6.9 1 6.8 FO. TWO 8 8 3.2 _ 3.5 4.8 4.2 4.5 FORCE THREE 6 7 2.4V 3.4 �A -3.6- 4.1 3.6 CHANGES IN PERSONNEL i` DAILY AVERAGE PATROL STRENGTH 1. Present for duty end of last month 29 This Same Month 2. Recruited during month _-0 Month Last Year 3. Reinstated during month 0 1. Total number field officers 15 16 Total to account for 29 -- 2. Less Agents Assi.g- 4. Separations from the service: ned to Investi.gat. 0 _ 0 (a) Voluntary resignation 1 3. Average daily abs- 0 ences of field off- icers owing to: (c) Resigned with charges pending 0 (a) Vacation, _usp- ensi.on, da%- off, (d) Dropped during probation 0 corr,p. Lime etc. 5.9 1 7.1 (e) Dismissed for cause 0 (b) Sick d Injured .2 1.0 (f) Killed in line of duty 0 (c) Schools, etc. .1 .1 (g) Deceased 0 Total average daily absences 6.2 8.2 Total separations 1 8.8 7.8 r 5.! ' sent for duty at end of month 28 4. Available for duty C"I I s for Sory cc. TN., "o.-ith 1,276 Yczov to !)-:I(. 9,989 A. Oj)ji; .,,Lc,cj 1,854.4 k' — '1-,*:-,,-.--384.6 PART C1, Ar-rc"t A. 1k):I;ic;de --1 ------ C. It c I bb 4 -3 3 jAi rt;];!r y 4 F. Larceny 2 At I I o TJ Arswl 2 79 3-8 30 T I I. PART—1 I-'I OT ----73- 54- 56 TO 1W, Part_ L 152 92 86 IV. IMAL PllL',QNIS OfAliC!-J): 86 a. Adult- tlale -- 50----- C. 'JuVC1111C 'Lllc- —21b. AduIt Fcr-iIv --_iod, 5 - V. W&RPA-N'F,� Si:k 'ED 12 VT. TOTAL FROP""RTY LOSS 42,93-5------- $.11,268 V11. TR A F F]C a. Accideiits 27Ir j rr:.cc5 FaLaj 0 b. -Ci t a t i oris: VBR (Spf p: ) 123 yic.l.-I ii, 11t Followiii- too 4 R dL 52 33 1"I'propo-i- Tilrn 19 R,c k'1 4 Car( J 1)r i ,,i.i t.- 7 1)!, j%.j 4 Drip- i il"; c Supc nd( (]--21---0 th: -,-54 180 322.--- C. Yriforccm-nt Tndc% 64.40 d. 'rra f r ic. Enf orc(,;oc-l:t `o 1 'JD', Ili i Nontli Tit.'- .- 502 Y-or to D-itu 3,448 fit i 5; Month L;ist Y, 401 Y:of to 1: te 3,121 L Y( s L Y C- l';tr L I C-ciu!-:; C]' 48.1% Part YL Criwt.-,; Cl, - ----- PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS //• l FUEL USED DATE: August 1984 Gallons Monthly Unin De t. Gallons X yr-to-date $ Amount Account Number PWWW 381 .5 I. 163 612 .9 05-02120-650 PWST 250. 1 . 107 400.5 05-02130-650 PWSS 29.7 .01 65.3 05-02150-650 PWP 146.4 063 264.9 05-02140-650 ADM 14.7 6 43.8 05-03200-650 ENC. 83-3 .036 184.8 05-02160-650 BLDG 74.0 .032 180.3 05-02220-650 PD 9 172.9_ .509 2,475.1 05-01120-650 tPD 116.9 .05 220.3 05-01130-650 oa er Cars 87.7 05-03200-650 TOTALS _ 4,535.6 GALLONS' IN • 3,470 GALLONS OUT: (2M340.0) UUO - - 0 . NET: 3�t1 • 5 + � 5r1 . 1 + CC: Frank Currie 166 4 + Jerry McNurlin 1 4 • '/ + Capt . Jennings 8 3 . 3 + Sgt . Newman i !� + Cindy Cranston 1 1 '/ � • + l lF • �� + + 1lll PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS 9/11/84 Hatntenance Report Date. YEAR TO DATE CURRENT HONTH (Aug ) 1984 PWO PD TOTAL PWO PD TOTAL 011 60.87 22.84 83.71 85.39 58.28 143.67 41.08 6.20 47.28 41.08 171.88 212.96 Tires Maint . Labor Ma int . 40.68 27.65 68.33 181.90 63.73 245.63 Parts - Repair Labor Repair 2,332.03 815.4 Parts 9 3 147.52 1,534.97 324.84 1,859.81 Out-side 29.58 16.00 45.58 186.05 67.50 253.55 Re air 2254.24 2996. 16 5 250.40 FUEL 1,248.75 1,437.35 2,686.10 , , � 5,080.69 417.3.04 9,253.73 TOTAL 2,955.93 1,834.88 4,790.81 , CC: Frank Currie Jerry McNurlin Lt. Wheeler P A R K M A I N T E N A N C E R E P O R T For Month of: August 1984 _ There was a total of 303 hours maintenance at Cook Park, with 44.5 hours mowing, 81.0 hours irrigation maintenance, 75.0 hours restroom maintenance, 21.5 hours ballfield maintenance, 2.0 hours building maintenance, 52.5 hours landscaping, 5.5 hours trails maintenance and 21.0 hours construction (pic- nic tables) . There was an additional 38.0 hours labor in Cook park by Com- munity Service workers. City Employees Green Thumb Employees 19.5 hrs mowing 25.0 hrs mowing 81.0 hrs irrigation 43.0 hrs restroom maintenance 32.0 hrs restroom maintenance 16.5 hrs ballfield maintenance 5 .0 hrs ballfield maintenance 2.0 hrs building maintenance 32.5 hrs landscaping 20.0 hrs landscaping 4.5 hrs trails maintenance 1.0 hr trails maintenance 13.0 hrs construction 8.0 hrs construction Liberty Park: 4.0 hrs mowing, 6.0 hrs irrigation and 2.0 hrs by Green Thumbers in landscaping. Summerlake Park: 24.0 hrs mowing (12.0 by Greenthumbers) , 2.0 hrs irrigation, 97.0 hrs trails maintenance (16.0 Green Thumb labor) . Woodard Park: .5 hr mowing. Englewood Park: 20.0 hrs mowing, 222 hrs landscaping (18.0 by Green Thumb labor) ., plus 795 hrs by TYCA group. Jack Park: 14.5 hrs mowing (8.0 by Green Thumb labor) . City Hall: 3.5 hrs mowing. Police Department: 5.5 hrs mowing (3.0 hrs by Greenthumbers) , 4.5 hrs irriga- tion maintenance. 99W and Main Street Park: 7.0 hrs mowing (3.0 hrs Green Thumb labor) , 1 hr irrigation, 1.0 hr landscaping by Green Thumb labor. 1.0 hr spent in planting trees on 72nd street. Bus Stops: 5.0 hrs maintenance. CC: Jerry McNurlin Park Board t F v L O O F U Y O y O ti .. a 7 Y 1 Y Y • O 6 O V • O ■ N O� N I O� Vl _ r i L ■ V � O ^' � t�1 _ N _ N ^1 �1 Y • aG s. �V M I O O =J N N r � r I 0 .. y H v ■ < D o o I m o r ao Go 7C O V C Y • � V N I S = V Y � r m .O n .p O r v •.+ �O a0 N aD O .t Y V V n P1 a0 S S _ • go N x • O T J •! _ aD ' n V1 N J a0 N J 7 0 r .p V1 N N O C y V O7 J W O • aD .O � O O � � r V 7 O O Ctm n d N ~ O O O a0 N a 4 th O J1 le O N N n N J n N rw . w • S i 0r e� �� �► • . �• • .. ..0 . • .• . = V •i •% •�M i .•Y� y Y VJ V M .iY •• .i ♦• wi Y• • • �+ 0.7 V • <. Y Y . V Mi .Y NY N V In s e e � o e o e e e e o e e e o o e 10 O O V 1 6 � Y � •6 • O �d Y • OL J • V Y • �C K d S u V y O a I 1 • • L I e � K V p w w y L d W W ~ J II I Z 1 O N N W C O N W j P O O I rN1 Y 4 O V IC F ZV I O O IC = n N e _ • V `O t'1 f+ V V Y u O� u1 O C V P JDN w ■ O P d O P N N C a n N W O Y V n J ■ r O m N V Q n N O O e C O N aD P J O 00 L �p u1 u1 P N 7 • W V P • i i r • s � • i � • Y Y i e C • r •.1 •y V Y V V O i r • w r 7� 7 i W ■ • e �v t ,,,� r e •e r r r .� •• C •1 > i= •« 7i • a s e s v � « W 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 s ) .J O. J Y _ O •� V • O 6� Y w Y v J Y w J •G d "� V C O w w i Op m a W u O V tll N N J W W � H r � W L o V C � r V • G ry n � N O 7 O s n ae7o a IK z o � n o• x o o � n N Z = r r a v o 0 H Z • w O n a n aD .O ••y Va'1 n ry P1 •O O .O O cc Ov Wo T T m0 a T CO .L- •O .O • � n .O a � V1 P1 � � N O� Y'O o O O • � V O� O � � = w � • i n o E r o r o o a o y • r �= e r r � � w • N w .�• � Y V � •t •i •t `� `_ •E `E•.V �V •.r �Y �V •.V IL y V V V P O W Al Uff OF TIGARD MONTHLY REPORT WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON DATE: 9/12/84 For the month of August 1984 OPERATIONS OFFICE WASTE WATER: 2 . 1. 2 93.0 hrs T.V. inspection 73.0 hrs Storm Drain Repairs 15.0 hrs Santiary Sewer Clean 76.0 hrs Community Service Labor 18.0 hrs Storm Drain Clean 2.0 hrs Sanitary Repairs 2.0 hrs Smoke Test 22.0 hrs Manhole Repairs 18,0 hrs Ditching STREETS : 2 . 1. 3 GREEN THUMB LABOR 34.5 hrs Street Cleaning 23.0 hrs Patching 20.5 hrs Painting & Street Marking 92.5 hrs Sign Maintenance 8.0 hrs Sign Maintenance 34.5 hrs Brushing & Limbing 63.5 hrs Grading & Rocking 1.0 hr Sanding PARKS : 2 . 1.4 GREEN THUMB LABOR 88.5 hrs Mowing 47.0 hrs Mowing 97.5 hrs Irrigation 4.0 hrs Irrigation 47.0 hrs Restroom Maintenance 27.0 hrs Restroom Maint. 16.5 hrs Ballfield Maintenance 5.0 hrs Ballfield Maint. 3.0 hrs Building Maintenance 251.0 hrs Landscaping 42.0 hrs Landscaping 78.5 hrs Trail Maintenance 17.0 hrs Trail Maint. 10.0 hrs- Construction 11.0 hrs Construction SUPPORT SERVICES: 2.1.5 48.0 hrs Community Serv. Labor 22.25 hrs PM on Equipment 170.50 hrs Scheduled Repair 58.75 hrs Unscheduled Repair 1.0 hr Tire Service 7.0 hrs Fabrication 2.0 hrs Road Service 49.5 hrs Building Maintenance 21.5 hrs General Support E 12755 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD.OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 P A R K M A I N T E N A N C E R E P O R T For Month of:_ August 1984 There was a total of 303 hours maintenance at Cook Park, with 44.5 hours mowing, 81.0 hours irrigation maintenance, 75.0 hours restroom maintenance, 21.5 hours ballfield maintenance, 2.0 hours building maintenance, 52.5 hours landscaping, 5.5 hours trails maintenance and 21.0 hours construction (pic- nic tables) . There was an additional 38.0 hours labor in Cook park by Com- munity Service workers. City Employees Green Thumb Employees 19.5 hrs mowing 25.0 hrs mowing 81.0 hrs irrigation 43.0 hrs restroom maintenance 32.0 hrs restroom maintenance 16.5 hrs ballfield maintenance 5.0 hrs ballfield maintenance 2.0 hrs building maintenance 32.5 hrs landscaping 20.0 hrs landscaping 4.5 hrs trails maintenance 1.0 hr trails maintenance 13.0 hrs construction 8.0 hrs construction Liberty Park: 4.0 hrs mowing, 6.0 hrs irrigation and 2.0 hrs by Green Thumbers in landscaping. Summerlake Park: 24.0 hrs mowing (12.0 by Greenthumbers) , 2.0 hrs irrigation, 97.0 hrs trails maintenance (16.0 Green Thumb labor) . Woodard Park: .5 hr mowing. Englewood Park: 20.0 hrs mowing, 222 hrs landscaping (18.0 by Green Thumb labor) ., plus 795 hrs by TYCA group. Jack Park: 14.5 hrs mowing (8.0 by Green Thumb labor) . City Hall: 3.5 hrs mowing. Police Department: 5.5 hrs mowing (3.0 hrs by Greenthumbers) , 4.5 hrs irriga- tion maintenance. 99W and Main Street Park: 7.0 hrs mowing (3.0 hrs Green Thumb labor) , 1 hr irrigation, 1.0 hr landscaping by Green Thumb labor. 1.0 hr spent in planting trees on 72nd street. Bus Stops: 5.0 hrs maintenance. CC: Jerry McNurlin Park Board CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: SEPTEMBER 24, 1984 AGENDA ITEM N: DATE SUBMITTED: September 19, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: August Department Report REQUESTED BY: MACC Report DEPARTMENT-MgAQ_OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR: ----- ------- ------------------- -- ----------- INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached are the minutes from the August meeting of the Metropolitan Area Cummunicatiuns Cuuunission. According Lo a report dated June 30, there were 2,188 subscribers in Tigard of a possible 7,781 housing units which is a 28.1% penetration. They are now targeting on multiple dwelling units and construction in areas added to the franchise since the o, iginal agreement. During September the City has received an increasing number of complaints regarding Storer's installation, marketing and phone services. We have notified both MACC and Storer, trying to resolve concerns. We are identify- ing small areas where cable is not available to single-family residences. The next meeting is September 19 at 1:30 p.m. ----- xxc x xxxxx x x x=x x x xx x x xx cx x a x xxx a a- asaa:--sass _- ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ---suss as-x ---------------------- SUGGESTED --ass-as---sass------SUGGESTED ACTION Receive and File METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Minutes August 15, 1984 A meeting of the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission was called to order by Vice Chairman Connie Fessler in the City of Beaverton Council Chambers, 4950 SW. Hall Blvd. at 1 :30 p.m. Present were Herb Hirst, North Plains; Denis Borman, King City; Mark Arbuthnot, Cornelius; Carol Maul , Beaverton ; Tim Erwert, Hillsboro; Joy Martin, Tigard; Steve Rhodes, Tualatin ; Bob Haas, Tualatin ; Jim Coleman, Lake Oswego; Dan Schean, Ri vergrove. Mr. Erwert moved approval of the minutes of July 18, 1984. Seconded by Mr. Rhodes. Motion carried. There were no visitors present who wished to speak at this time. Consent Agenda: The July financial report was not available at this time. There were no other items on the consent agenda. Construction Report: Mr. Tierney reported tnat the north end of Wilsonville still needs to be completed. South of the river needs designing and problems have been worked out with the independent phone company to proceed. Aloha is progressing according to schedule. It will be six weeks to two months before construction actually begins. Within six months of July 1 , Lake Oswego will being switching subscribers to the Tigard hub. Mr. Tierney indicated that he notified Storer Metro that in MACC's opinion the system is complete, but there are still a few areas that need to be proofed. Mr. Nelson, Storer Metro, said they are making a major effort to complete MDU's by the end of the year which will account for a major portion of their new subscribers. Mr. Erwert asked if there were any projections of actual MDU's not yet completed and if it would be possible for Storer Metro to include this figure in their quarterly report. Mr. Nelson indicated this would be done. Premium Service Rates : Mr. Tierney explained that Storer Metro will he raising their premium channel rates by $3.00 effective September 1 , 1984. This will affect all premium channels except Disney for the first premium channel. Additional premium channels will remain at $6.95 per month. He noted that this is in accordance with the commitment by Storer Metro to freeze premium rates for 30 months from the date of the franchise, and that MACC has no rate regulatory authority over premium rates. t E MACC Minutes -2- 8/15/84 Subscriber Report: Mr. Tierney reported that there are 12,916 subscribers as of June, 1984, which is a 25% penetration of total households. Construction still needs to be done at most MDUs. Approximately 35% of the households in the service are are MDU's. Franchise Fees : Mr. Tierney said that estimated franchise fees per the proposal for 1983-84 were $152,000. In MACC's original budget, projections were $131 ,000. In the revised budget, the estimated figure was $101 ,000. There have been $107,000 in actual fees received. Demonstration Projects : Mr. Tierney reported that there are a few problems in getting the projects started for lack of the required equipment. He said the City of Beaverton data link would be the first demonstration project and hopes to begin in mid-September. Beaverton School District is in the works. The Fire District could be moved forward because they do not need equipment that is being waited on for the other projects. Administrator's Evaluation: Ms. Fessler indicated that the executive committee recommended awarding Mr. Tierney a 10% increase based on merit as well as salaries of comparable positions in other similar cable franchise areas. Mr. Rhodes moved to award the Administrator a 10% salary increase r effective July 1 , 1984. Seconded by Mr. Borman. Motion carried. Programming Survey: Mr. Tierney noted that Mr. Beecher of his staff has done a local government cable television programming survey for a meeting in Denver. He encouraged members of the Board to use the government access channels and make known their availability. He indicated that the MACC staff would be able to assist in any efforts. Ms. Maul brought to the attention of the Board a letter that was received by the Beaverton City Council from a citizen who had complaints regarding the phone system and billing system of Storer Metro. She asked for a response from Storer Metro on how to deal with the citizen complaints that she, as a councilperson , receives. Mr. Nelson, Storer Metro, responded that he was not familiar with this particular complaint and explained that due to the vast number of subscribers to the system, they would undoubtedly receive complaints such as this. He noted that as a result of a study done in March on their response times they have implemented a system of three WATS lines, nine customer service lines and added three customer service people. In anticipation of next year's growth, they are looking to increase the number of customer service lines and employees. He indicated he would be willing to discuss these problems on an individual basis with Ms. Maul. Mr. Borman felt that Storer Metro's communication with the jurisdictions is also very poor. He noted that he had written a letter to Mr. Wilson seven months ago and still has had no response. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 2:20 p.m. CRespectfully submitted, Gaye Fortier, for Herald Campbell Secretary-Treasurer CITYOF TIGAIW WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON Dear Business Owner: The City Council of Tigard at their meeting of December 5, 1983, amended the Business Tax section of the Tigard Municipal Code. This amendment affects what you will pay as a Business Tax. Previously, the tax structure was based on what type of business you operated. The new schedule is based on the number of employees you have working within the City of Tigard. The rates are as follows: Small (0-10 employees) $ 40.00 per year Medium (11-50 employees) 75.00 per year Large (51 or more employees) 150.00 per year The number of employees working wichin the City of Tigard is computed as full-time equivalent employees = the total number of hours worked by all employees working within the City of Tigard per year divided by 2,080 hours equals the number of full-time equivalent employees working within the City of Tigard. In addition to this rate change, the Council added that the business would have to certify to the accuracy of the reported number of full-time equivalent employees working within the City of Tigard. Enclosed with this letter is the notice of renewal of your business tax. Please complete the Business Tax Information Sheet and return it with your poyment. A Business Tax Receipt will be mailed to you. If you are no longer doing business in the city of Tigard, please advise us so we can update our records. If you have any questions, please contact my office. Sincerely yours, CITY OF TIGARD Jerri L. Widner Finance Director (JLW:pm/0258F) Enc. 12755 S.W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 kI Tax Cert Date _ Amount $ BUiXW" TAX IWONIATION Bim' aowcorow BUSINESS NAME BUSINESS ADDRESS OWNERS OR PRIMARY CONTACT CITY, STATE, ZIP MAILING ADDRESS BUSINESS PHONE NUMBER CITY, STATE, ZIP �LOYggS*** PRIMARY CONTACT PHONE NUMBER ***Full-time equivalent employee to be defined as the total number of hours worked by all employees working within the City of Tigard divided by 2,080 hours equals the number of full-time equivalent employees working within the City of Tigard. DESCRIPTION OF TYPE OF BUSINESS: i mss:ssssss:ss:sas sassasssssssss::s:ss:mss:sssssssssasas:ssassasssasass:::ssssss NOTE: Solicitation Or Sale "Door-To-Door" In Residential Areas Are Prohibited Within The City Limits of Tigard. saslsssssssssssssassssastsssssasssss:mssssssss:sssasssassslssasssssasssssssss: NOTE: A Business Tax Receipt Does Not Imply City Approval Or Endorsement To Operate The Business Or The Location Of The Business. Questions On Permits And Land Use Regulations Can Be Refereed To :he Appropriate Department At City Hall. spm:sasssasssssssssssaslssssss:ssssss:s:ssasssssssassssssssssssasssassssassss If Tax Exempt, Please Submit Documentation. I certify the information on this information sheet is true and correct. Signature of Authorized Representative Date print Name and Title Tax Exempt Status Approval JLW(0ll9F) g/ 4 r� CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY consent AGENDA OF: Sept. 24 1984 AGENDA ITEM DATE SUBMITTED: Sept. 9, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Tigard High - REQUESTED BY: City Council iSrhonl Fonth ll Camp Pnliciny ., � CI'PY AUMINTSTRA'COR: DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: INFORMATION SUMMARY Tigard High Officials have agreed .to hire one additional R2serve Police Officer to work the remaining three home-play football games. Staffing as follows: Sept. 28th (Homecoming) 4 reserves Oct. 12 3 reserves Oct. 19 3 reserves The additional Reserve Officer will be assigned to work parking problems in those areas adjacent to or affected by extra volume of vehicles. -In addition to the parking enforcement, traffic control will be provided at S.W. 92nd at Durham Road when the games are over. Regular police officers will assist as time allows. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED SUGGESTED ACTION t� l A. f MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON September 240 1984 TO: City Council 0 FROM: Elizabeth Newton, Alternate, CDBG Policy Advisory Board SUBJECT: Status of Terrace Heights Mobile Home Residents On Thursday, September 13, 1984, the Community Development Block Grant Policy Advisory Board voted unanimously to allocate $25,000 for a planning consultant to address the Terrace Heights residents issue. The Director of the Office of Community Development will prepare criteria to be used in the selection of the consultant. The criteria will be reviewed by the Policy Advisory Board at their October meeting. The planning consultant will be contracted to address the Terrace Heights residents situation but also will develop county wide policies for relocation of mobile home park residents displaced by development. The consultant's contract will be administered by the Director of the Office of Community Development. rl N N y Od < Q 00 < N N D •+ yl 1 C 0 H ►On 1 N 1A N N H H N H cc V4 N 1 fn e�1 .. 002 * N V � 1 9p =0 XxV �1 .., m I m .4 W v L r�, �► .. N d O 13 IE1 .O-r O L. 0 � , a : . e� 49 x yIE 1 P4 < , 9-4 , N Aj lK Q H ma C M V 10 C 1q O 1D y �y O 1 ..r P4IN 96 w3y �y V .SLt L. J � � O � p ` p .�� 0 � Oy Y La p N1 O A r1 p r: af- ker: eras P.-W3 r. Cry[ r. %1 %0 V �` ��i. y ap r A¢¢,.1 N b � e a